Author: Kalantarian Kevo

FIRST AUCTION OF BONDS WITH 20-YEAR MATURITY HELD

Noyan Tapan
Feb 14, 2008

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 14, NOYAN TAPAN. The primary placement of RA state
long-term milestone coupon (AMGB20072283 issue) bonds with 20-year
maturity took place on February 14. Four agenst participated in
the auction. NT was informed by the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA)
press service that the total amount of offers at the auction made 3
bln 571 mln 490 thousand drams (about 11.5 mln USD), the amount of
non-competitive offers made 440 mln drams, the total amount of offers
satisfied made 3 bln 571 mln 490 thousand drams, the maximum yield
of placed bonds made 11% and the weighted average yield made 10.9755%.

It is noteworthy that it is for the first time that the RA ministry
of finance and economy issues bonds of this maturity of the total
amount of 80 bln drams. NT correspondent was informed by the head of
the ministry’s state debt servicing department Arshaluys Margarian
that the bonds of the indicated amount will be placed within three
years. Bonds of 25 bln drams will be placed in 2008.

In his words, bonds whose interest rates are a milestone for formation
of interest rates of other state bonds are considered as milestone
bonds. It is envisaged that bonds of other maturity will be gradually
replaced by long-term bonds through several large issues.

According to the CBA press service, 20-year maturity bonds issued
on Febraury 7 will be sold at a discount on the nominal value and
will be redeemed by the nomunal value. The annual yield of bond
coupons will make 11% and will be calculated with respect to bonds
in circulation. Coupon payments will be made every six months. The
day of bonds’ redemption is February 7, 2028.

Transitions on Line, Czech Republic
Feb 14 2008

Watching Armenia, Quietly

by Rovshan Ismayilov
14 February 2008

Analysts in Baku wonder who is the better candidate in the Armenian
presidential race. From EurasiaNet.

BAKU | In Azerbaijan, official or public interest in Armenia’s
upcoming presidential election is minimal. Few in Baku see the
impending political transition in Yerevan as having much of an impact
on efforts to break the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations stalemate.

Despite a recent push to revive peace talks, analysts contend that a
lack of popular hope in Baku for the normalization of Azeri-Armenian
relations, or for the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, is behind
the lack of interest in the Armenian election.

The Azeri government’s indifferent stance reinforces this impression.
The identity of Armenia’s new president, foreign ministry
spokesperson Khazar Ibrahim succinctly commented, `will be the choice
of the Armenian voters and society.’

The Armenian vote is viewed generally by Azeri onlookers as a choice
between just two candidates, even though nine are officially in the
race. The winner of the 19 February election will replace Robert
Kocharian, who must leave office after serving two terms.

Serzh Sarkisian
Most believe that the two candidates with any chance of winning are
Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian, who is seen as the favorite, and
former president Levon Ter-Petrosian, who was in office during
Armenia’s 1988-1994 war with Azerbaijan over control of Karabakh.

>From Baku’s perspective, the other seven candidates in Yerevan simply
do not exist. There is virtually no mention of them in the Azeri
media, and their movements and statements generally are not followed
by Baku political analysts or government officials. Between Sarkisian
and Ter-Petrosian, the latter is seen as a political leader more open
to compromise with Azerbaijan.

READY FOR COMPROMISE?

`Ter-Petrosian is an experienced politician who is ready for
courageous solutions,’ commented Rasim Musabekov, an
opposition-friendly political analyst in Baku. `And his speeches show
he is readier to stop the hostilities with Azerbaijan. But the issue
is whether Ter-Petrosian will be able to control the hawks in the
Armenian administration.’

`He said several times that it is necessary for Armenia to have
better relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey,’ agreed Rauf Mirkadirov,
a political columnist for the Russian-language daily Zerkalo (Mirror)
who recently returned from a trip to Armenia. `Of course, better
relations are not possible without compromises on the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue.’

Former presidential foreign policy aide Vafa Guluzade, who took part
in the Karabakh peace talks during the 1990s, also sees Ter-Petrosian
as capable of `real’ compromises – a pullout from the seven occupied
Azeri territories surrounding Karabakh and the start of some form of
cooperation with Azerbaijan. Guluzade blames Russia’s supposed
dislike of such compromises for the former president’s resignation in
1998.

With the pro-Russian Sarkisian in power, Guluzade forecasted, `the
[peace] process will remain stuck. `

The deputy chairman of the Azeri Parliament’s Security and Defense
Committee disagreed. `I do not see a big difference between them,’
Aydin Mirzazade said, referring to the Sarkisian and Ter-Petrosian
positions on Karabakh. `It was Ter-Petrosian who appointed Karabakh
war hawks Serzh Sarkisian and Robert Kocharian [as] Armenian defense
minister and prime minister, respectively.’

Speeches made by Ter-Petrosian, though, Mirzazade continued, indicate
that he grasps `Azerbaijan’s growing strength’ – a phrase commonly
used to refer to the country’s energy-fueled economic boom and recent
military buildup.

Mirzazade said regardless of who wins, `the new president will have
to consider the new realities of our region and Azerbaijan’s growing
military and economic potential.’

Analyst Musabekov sees Sarkisian as out of sync with those `new
realities.’

`This group does not really understand the situation in the region …
and does not see the risks that Azerbaijan is getting stronger.
Sarkisian is more confrontational,’ he said.

The Foreign Ministry’s Ibrahim noted only that the government hopes
Armenia’s next president will take a `more constructive position on
the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.’

The expected victory by Sarkisian could bring some benefits for the
Karabakh peace process, Musabekov suggested. `Sarkisian is from the
incumbent administration that conducts talks with Azerbaijan. If he
wins, there will not be need for delays in the negotiation process.
He will not need time to get a grasp of the situation.’

The fact that Sarkisian is originally from Karabakh is another
advantage, Musabekov continued. `Because once he decides to accept
compromises, he will face fewer problems to persuade the elite of
Nagorno-Karabakh to agree with that.’

Another independent political expert, Ilgar Mammadov, believes that
the election means Yerevan is currently under greater outside
pressure than Baku to compromise on Karabakh.

INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE

In early January, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe’s Minsk Group, which is overseeing negotiations between
Armenia and Azerbaijan, traveled to Baku, Yerevan, and Karabakh. `The
reason for these renewed efforts [by both governments] lies in the
understanding that there is a high correlation between election
cycles and the negotiation process,’ Mammadov noted. `Previously, the
presidents of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, when up for election, have
always promised a compromise in order to ensure the West’s support
amidst election fraud and failed to deliver such a compromise
afterwards under various pretexts.’

Eventually, though, international pressure will focus on Azerbaijan,
he said. `Apparently, Yerevan is pressed harder now, but the pressure
will shift to Baku after April, heading towards the October 2008
presidential elections in Azerbaijan,’ he noted.

If Ter-Petrosian somehow wins the vote, Mammadov believes, Western
pressure on Azerbaijan will stay strong, even after its upcoming
presidential poll. `He already says he is ready for compromises.
Therefore, if he wins, the West will demand more compromises from
Baku as well,’ the expert said.

Rovshan Ismayilov is freelance journalist based in Baku. A partner
post from EurasiaNet.

TV COVERAGE OF SARKISIAN RALLIES RAISES QUESTIONS
By Emil Danielyan and Ruzanna Khachatrian

Radio Liberty, Czech Republic
Feb 13 2008

Armenia’s electronic media have long been loyal to the government,
and there is nothing unusual about their highly positive coverage of
Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian’s election campaign. What is unusual
is the fact that Armenian state television and the more than a dozen
national private networks take one day to prepare and broadcast
reports on his campaign rallies.

This apparently coordinated policy has left media watchers scratching
their heads and sparked opposition allegations that TV reports on
Sarkisian rallies are censored and even doctored before being aired.

The supposedly competing broadcasters strongly deny this, saying that
the prime minister usually meets voters late in the afternoon or
in the evening and that their journalists are physically unable to
report on those high-profile events in depth on the same day. Such
explanations are less than convincing, though, considering the fact
the TV channels inform viewers about other events taking place in
Armenia in a far more timely manner.

"The prime minister’s meetings take place in the afternoon and in order
to be able to ensure the principle of equality [of all presidential
candidates] we air reports the next day," said Shavarsh Gevorgian,
head of the news service of H2, Armenia’s most accessible private TV
channel. "And this is true not only for Serzh Sarkisian’s meetings."

"Please, don’t look for anything suspicious here, especially
in relation to our TV company because we don’t cover Serzh
Sarkisian’s campaign every day," said Gegham Manukian, chairman of
the Yerkir-Media channel controlled by the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation (Dashnaktsutyun).

Manukian claimed that even some campaign rallies held by
Dashnaktsutyun’s presidential candidate, Vahan Hovannisian, were
shown on Yerkir-Media the next day. He insisted that Dashnaktsutyun
and its broadcasting arm did not cut any deals with a government
which Hovannisian regularly criticizes in his campaign speeches.

Sarkisian’s campaign team and the governing Republican Party of Armenia
(HHK) also defend the one-day time lag. "I think there is a technical
problem involved because our meetings in remote regions take place
late in the evening and I think it’s not quite possible to report on
them the same day," Eduard Sharmazanov, the HHK spokesman, told RFE/RL.

Sarkisian’s rallies usually take place before 4 p.m. local time. In
Yerevan, prime minister campaigned earlier in the afternoon, giving
TV journalists enough time to prepare their reports before evening
news programs.

Opposition representatives, meanwhile, claim that Sarkisian-related TV
reports are censored by the authorities. Ruzan Khachatrian, a former TV
journalist and spokeswoman for the opposition People’s Party supporting
former President Levon Ter-Petrosian, went further last week, alleging
that the Sarkisian campaign itself produces those reports and sends
them to the numerous local broadcasters. She said the authorities
are anxious to demonstrate a high degree of popular support for the
election favorite and hide the fact that many teachers, doctors and
other public sector employees are forced to attend his gatherings.

The Yerevan Press Club (YPC), an independent media watchdog closely
monitoring the election coverage, believes that the censorship claims
are not necessarily wide of the mark even if there is no compelling
evidence to substantiate them. "The identical coverage of the election
campaign by the seven TV channels [monitored by the YPC] is enough
of a reason to suspect some sort of a guidance or hidden censorship,"
the YPC chairman, Boris Navasardian, told RFE/RL.

"We too have noticed the existence of such a phenomenon and will try
to see if it that kind of coverage is really a pattern in the next
few days," he said. "And if it is a pattern, then we definitely have
a problem."

The YPC repeatedly criticized the Armenian TV stations for presenting
Sarkisian in an exclusively positive light and showing "unprecedented"
bias against Ter-Petrosian.

ARA ABRAHAMYAN: ARMENIANS SHOULD UNITE FOR KARABAKH RESOLUTION

PanARMENIAN.Net
13.02.2008 17:35 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Presentation of "Nagorno Karabakh in international
law and world politics" collected documents took place in the Armenian
National Academy of Sciences today. The collection was published by
initiative of the World Armenian Congress and the Union of Armenians
of Russia. The three volume edition was organized by international
law professor Yuri Barseghov.

Congratulating the attendees on the publication, WAC President
Ara Abrahamyan said that the purpose of the collection is to refute
Azerbaijan’s ongoing distortion of history and find adequate peaceful
solutions to the existing problems.

"Armenians throughout the globe should unite for a peaceful resolution
of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

We should prove that Nagrono Karabakh has always been an Armenian
territory and its annexation to Azerbaijan is inadmissible. These
collected documents can make a contribution to the process," he said.

FALSIFICATION OF HISTORY OF THE KARABAKH MOVEMENT CONTINUES?
Gagik Avanesyan

KarabakhOpen
13-02-2008 11:03:07
Hadrut

During the meeting of the commission for the celebration of the 20th
anniversary of the Karabakh Movement which was covered on the Public
Television of Artsakh, Janna Galstyan suggested publishing the names
of the people who organized the Karabakh movement starting from the
"underground". The co-chair of the commission and speaker of the
NKR National Assembly Ashot Ghulyan gave an answer in the spirit of
the Turkish government denying the Genocide of Armenians in 1915:
"Let historians deal with it."

It is sad but hardly 20 years have passed, and the organizers and
activists of the Karabakh Movement are already mentioned selectively,
proceeding from the political conjuncture. Perhaps the historians will
announce their names many years later, posthumously, like spies. The
names of the alive seem to bother someone. Not everyone has access
to the media, and if someone who has access to the media sees only
"himself in the Movement", distorts facts, falsification of history
starts. Silencing is the same as lying and falsifying history.

Yesterday is already history, and it cannot be changed, independent
from whether someone likes how they lived that day. It concerns not
only the government but also some activists of the Karabakh Movement
who try "not to remember" "inconvenient" names. It also concerns
everyone who is in charge of organizing the celebration of the 20th
anniversary of the beginning of the Karabakh Movement. Unconscientious
attitude toward history is intolerable. In particular, the presence
of Member of Parliament V.

Avanesyan from the region of Hadrut in the commission who has nothing
to do with the Karabakh Movement is also part of falsification. How
can this commission be objective?

Meanwhile, history is that the first meeting in the Autonomous Region
of Nagorno-Karabakh was in the evening of February 12, 1988. The first
declaration on unification was signed and sealed on behalf of the
district soviet of People’s Deputies by E. Navasardyan, president of
the Executive Committee of the district soviet of Hadrut on February
13, 1988.

All the meetings in the other towns and Stepanakert took place
afterwards.

First in the NKAR the people of Hadrut protected the head of the
district soviet when the procuracy of Azerbaijan was going to take
E. Navasardyan to Baku on February 17, 1988.

The extraordinary session of the Regional Soviet of People’s Deputies
was held February 20, 1988 after the sessions of district soviets of
people’s deputies.

When history is written, the value of every fact should be realized
instead of fitting history to someone. During the office of the
ex-president Arkady Ghukasyan, for instance, to somehow link him
to the Karabakh Movement, insignificant occasions were presented as
"bold moves". For instance, there was a lot of praising of articles on
the February 20 decision of the Soviet of People’s Deputies published
in the February 22 issue of the Russian version of the Soviet Karabakh.

In the meantime, nobody stated that the same articles were published
in the Armenian version of the newspaper as well, and the editor of
the newspaper was not Arkady Ghukasyan, and the newspaper was the
official newspaper of the Soviet of People’s Deputies and it had no
right not to publish the decisions of the Soviet. If it was a matter
of boldness, why nothing was written about the meetings which shook
Nagorno-Karabakh before February 22?

Reality has nothing to do with those "fairy tales". There was a lot of
ambiguity in those years. In particular, while most party organizations
in Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region and the Bureau of the regional
committee of the party in Askeran had to approve the decision of the
Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the USSR,
defining the Karabakh movement as extremism, Hadrut was the first to
boycott it. Not everywhere in Karabakh the leaders were so determined.

As to the evaluation of history, in 20 years time it is obvious that
in the political and time aspect, everything was decided in Karabakh
and Yerevan within 9 days, between February 12 and February 20. The
role of Arkady Karapetyan, Arthur Mkrtichyan, Igor Muradyan, Manvel
Sargsyan and others is tremendous. Over the next three and a half
years it had to be kept up through counteractions out of necessity,
successful or not, meetings and parties for unification until the year
1991 when Karabakh took the initiative and again reached success both
in politics and battlefield.

As to the beginning of the armed struggle, it is the events in
Askeran when several guys with hunting rifles stopped the crowd of
thousands of Azerbaijanis. "When an Armenian with a rifle shows up,
the Azerbaijani female turban appears too to justify the escape
of their men." And maybe the names of those heroes have not been
announced out of fear that Azerbaijan will start searching them all
over the world? Meanwhile, this historic event can also serve as a
model for bringing up the young generation.

"CRIMINAL CASES NOT KEPT IN JUSTICE MINISTRY"

Panorama.am
16:27 12/02/2008

"No criminal cases were kept in the Ministry of Justice and there is
not any archive like that," said Aghvan Hovsepyan, the chief prosecutor
about the gossips spread around the fire in the ministry.

He ensured that those announcements are just gossips, that if the
ministry building was burnt to destroy some criminal case materials
and particularly the documents on 27 October.

The chief prosecutor considers those announcements are pre election
period means, and they are spread to mislead those who are not aware
of ministry’s activities.

Aghvan Hovsepyan also said that he appreciated the works of fire
brigade that they managed to localize and stop the fire on time.

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Feb 9 2008

AZERI PRESIDENT CONGRATULATES IRANIAN LEADERS ON ISLAMIC REVOLUTION
ANNIVERSARY

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has congratulated Iran’s supreme
leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i on the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic
Revolution, the Azerbaijani state news agency AzarTAc has reported.

In his message to Khamene’i, Ilham Aliyev vowed to continue efforts
to boost ties between the two Muslimneighbours, the agency said.

"On this happy day, I wish you good health and success in your work,"
the letter said. "I also wishthe friendly Iranian people peace and
prosperity."

In a separate letter, President Aliyev also congratulated his Iranian
counterpart Mahmud Ahmadinezhad on theanniversary of the Islamic
Revolution.

BBC Monitoring note: Despite official statements about "friendly"
relations between Azerbaijan and Iran,the two countries have serious
disputes on a number of issues, including the division of the Caspian
Sea. Tehran isunhappy about Azerbaijan’s warm relations with the USA
and Israel, while the authorities in Baku are displeased with Iran’s
growing economic cooperation with rival Armenia.

Iran has a sizable ethnic Azerbaijani population, the rights of which
also cause tensions between the twocountries.

Lragir, Armenia
Feb 8 2008

IT IS TOO LATE WHEN THE SOUND OF GUILLOTINE MAKES THINK

Opinions on the role of the society in the political processes in
Armenia conclude that either there is no role at all or it is formal.
In other words, public opinion does not determine anything in the
political life of Armenia. Moreover, some people think in no country
of the world is public opinion important. Those who think so, wearing
a Mona Lisa smile of astuteness, consider people who express a
different opinion as hopelessly ingenuous, telling them the secret of
the world rule in a friendly voice that all the decisions are made in
one place, in one room, at one table, and no society can compete with
this group which makes decisions.

In fact, this point of view contains a bit of truth. There is even
bit of logic in it. Naturally, in every normal country the minority
makes decisions, and the majority only approves those decisions. For
instance, the U.S. administration decided to shell Iraq. The decision
was made but was not brought into being until the American society
approves it. It is another problem through what technology the
approval, the support of the society is won. It is possible that the
U.S. government is not frank to the society when it says Iraq
possesses mass destruction weapon, Iraq is a hotbed of international
terrorism, it threatens the security of the U.S., September 11 is
traced back to Iraq. It is the internal affair of the U.S.
administration and people, however, a matter of their interrelation.
For us, the fact is interesting that although a small group makes a
decision proceeding for some interests to shell Iraq, it won’t make
that move unless the majority of the society approves it.

In other words, the society nevertheless determines something. God
decided to sacrifice his son to give humanity absolution but did not
do it through Pilates but through the public to which Pilates
appealed to choose between Barabbas and Jesus. The deciding role of
the society comes from the beginning of the Bible, and the voice of
people is the voice of God.

Therefore, if in a country the society does not make decisions
regarding crucial issues, it is first of all a violation of divine
rules. In other words, tampering the votes of the society in an
election is first of all impious then illegal, no matter how many
bishops and archbishops are involved in this `holy affair’. In the
case of Armenia attention and attitude toward this issue should be
more profound and subtle. After all, we claim to be the first nation
which converted to Christianity. Fortunately, we do not consider
shelling a country. In our case, our own country is concerned where a
presidential election is to be held, and where the will of the
society, i.e. the voice of God is going to be ignored. People are
forced to go to rallies, chant slogans, submit passports, swear to
vote, and all this is presented with a reference to the international
experience where no government is shaped by the majority, only out of
political expediency, PR and money. This political paganism costs the
state expensive. By persuading the society that it makes no
decisions, these pagans are preaching atheism, in fact. Meanwhile,
atheism is the direct path leading to a revolution, which all the
revolutions have confirmed, and which one of the fathers of the
French revolution Voltaire noted who realized from the sound of the
guillotine that `if there were no God, it would have been necessary
to invent him.’

HAKOB BADALYAN

INSTITUTION ON PROTECTION OF CUSTOMERS RIGHTS TO BE INTRODUCED IN
ARMENIAN FINANCIAL MARKET

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 7, NOYAN TAPAN. At the February 7 sitting, the
Armenian government approved the bill on circulation of credit
information and activities of credit bureaus, whose purpose is to
create legal bases for activities of credit bureaus, as well as to
regulate the activity of collection of credit information and
preparation of credit reports on its basis. The international expertise
in this sphere was used in developing this bill.

In connection with adoption of the bill, the government also approved
the bills on making addition or additions to the RA Law on Bank
Secrecy, the RA Law on Insurance and Insurance Activity, the RA Law on
the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA). These bills will be submitted to the
RA National Assembly in envisaged order.

The CBA deputy chairman Artur Javadian told reporters after the sitting
that the bill envisages introduction of a new institution – credit
bureau in Armenia, which will allow to expand the scope of
intermediating and crediting activities in the financial market.
Besides, extra mechanisms will be created for protection of customers
rights.

In the words of A. Javadian, a tradition will form, by which financial
organizations will also provide credits to persons who have no business
or items in pledge but who have a credit history.

Credit bureaus will carry out the activities of collection, processing,
formation and keeping of credit information and of preparation of
credit reports on this basis. Banks operating in the Republic of
Armenia, including branches of foreign banks, as well as credit
institutions and insurance companies will have to provide credit
information to all credit bureaus.

RAFFI HOVANNISIAN: NO ONE HAS GROUNDS TO MAKE STATEMENTS ON BEHALF OF ZHARANGUTIUN

Noyan Tapan
Feb 4, 2008

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 4, NOYAN TAPAN. "I am very happy that everyone says
its word, makes its supposition, but I think no one has grounds to make
statements on behalf of the Zharangutiun party," Raffi Hovannisian,
the party Chairman, said in his February 4 interview to Noyan Tapan and
Radio Liberty, touching upon the statements of presidential candidates
Levon Ter-Petrosian and Artur Baghdasarian made lately. The latters,
in particular, had declared publicly that Zharangutiun will unite
with them.

R. Hovannisian said that several weeks ago Zharangutiun’s Board
applied to the main four opposition candidates, L. Ter-Petrosian,
Vazgen Manukian, Vahan Hovhannisian, and A. Baghdasarian expecting
radical reconsideration of their positions in the preelection period
concerning the issue that a large long-lasting unification and not
one more short unification is needed in Armenia. "We wish the main
opposition candidates to come out of the oratorical arena and to be
engaged in strict, cold, serious reasoning, which will be decisive
for Armenia’s future," R. Hovannisian said.

He said that the consultations with the candidates continue. According
to R. Hovannisian, proceeding from the "developments" of the current
week, perhaps at the end of the week the party will make a final
decision. He also mentioned that not he himself but the party Board
will make the decision.