Author: Kalantarian Kevo

RELATIVES OF CAPTIVE SOLDIER DEMAND MEETING WITH ARMENIAN FM

August 15, 2013 | 16:27

YEREVAN. – Relatives of the captive soldier Hakob Injighulyan gathered
near the Armenian Foreign Ministry and demand a meeting with Minister
Edward Nalbandian.

Earlier they gathered near the Yerevan ICRC office where they got
no response, brother of the captive soldier Arman Injighulyan told
Armenian News-NEWS.am.

“We want Minister Nalbandian to interfere. We demand a meeting with
the Minister. What is the purpose of the foreign ministry, if it
cannot solve a problem related to foreign affairs?” he said.

As informed earlier, Armenian soldier Hakob Injighulyan (born in 1991)
found himself in the territory under the control of the adversary.

According to preliminary information, Injighulyan turned up there on
August 8 at around 3am, while carrying out his military service, by
crossing the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR)-Azerbaijan border, and
as a result of losing his orientation in the area. An investigation
is underway to determine the details of the incident, the NKR MOD
press service had informed.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

BAKU HAS AGAIN FOUND A PLATFORM FOR ITS COMPLAINTS ON KARABAKH ISSUE

by Tatevik Shahunyan

ARMINFO
Thursday, August 15, 14:59

“Azerbaijan supports the execution of the four UN Security Council
resolutions demanding the immediate and unconditional liberation
of the Armenian-occupied Azerbaijani lands”, – Foreign Minister of
Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov made such a statement when speaking at a
meeting of foreign ministers of the member-states of the Cooperation
Council of Turkic-speaking states on 15 August, in Gabala.

He also added that “Aggressive separatism, national and ethnic
conflicts, steps to forceably change the internationally recognized
borders of Azerbaijan and the violation of the territorial integrity
must be regarded as a threat which represents a serious threat.

The military aggression of Armenia, continuing for more than 20 years,
and the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, which arose as a result of
unfounded territorial claims, is an obvious example of this”.

NKR MFA: AZERI LEADERSHIP CONTINUES TO INTERPRET SELECTIVELY THE NORMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

12:52 15.08.2013

Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh

Authorities of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) have on numerous
occasions expressed their grave concern over the fraudulent campaign
by Azerbaijan aimed at distorting the essence of the conflict between
Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh and misleading the international
community. This campaign expands from year to year introducing new
sophisticated methods of falsifications, provocations, and revanchist
threats.

The most recent examples of such a propaganda campaign are the
circulation of the July 26, 2013 A/67/943-S/2013/442 letter in
the United Nations Organization calling upon the UN Member States
to warn their citizens against visiting the NKR “without the prior
authorization of the government of Azerbaijan” as well as publication
of a list of people declared personae non gratae by the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan because of their visits to the
NKR. This list of 335 individuals from 41 countries includes members of
parliaments, prominent public figures, culture and art professionals,
journalists, students and tourists.

In this respect the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the NKR deems
appropriate to state the following:

The NKR is an independent state with a population, which should
not be deprived of a possibility to exercise its fundamental human
rights under any circumstances as it is enshrined in the Article 2
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that “no
distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional
or international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or
under any other limitation of sovereignty”.

People of Nagorno Karabakh established their state exercising their
inalienable right to self-determination in full compliance with the
norms and principles of the international law and acting upon the
then effective constitutional and legal framework of the Soviet Union.

Since the very first day of its establishment the NKR, unlike
Azerbaijan, has assumed the course of building a democratic State
ensuring all the rights and freedoms for its citizens. The NKR
leadership intends to continue the policy of comprehensive development
of the Republic and its democratic institutions, and has repeatedly
expressed its readiness for mutually beneficial cooperation with all
interested parties.

>From the very beginning, Azerbaijan rejected any possibility of a
civilized dialogue with Nagorno Karabakh and adhered to the policy of
settling the conflict between Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh through
the application of brutal, unproportional and indiscriminate force
against the civilian population. It carried out ethnic cleansings in
Nagorno Karabakh proper and Armenian-populated areas of Azerbaijan,
unleashing full-fledged military aggression against Nagorno Karabakh.

Despite the ongoing negotiation process and commitments undertaken
since the conclusion of the cease-fire agreement, the Azeri leadership
continues to interpret selectively the norms and principles of the
international law, thus escalating tension and mistrust, as well as
ignoring the existing realities. Deluded by its language of threats and
hostility, Azerbaijan has made a step forward in a wrong direction,
and threatens with sanctions against the third countries nationals
visiting the NKR. Such a policy of Azerbaijan fits perfectly into
the logic of its domestic human rights record that it is striving to
impose upon foreign citizens.

These highly irresponsible steps thwart any attempts to establish an
atmosphere of trust between the NKR and the Republic of Azerbaijan,
which would be essential for the peaceful resolution of the conflict.

They also hinder the ongoing mediation efforts by the Minsk Group
Co-Chairs of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) to find a comprehensive and lasting solution to the conflict
between Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh.

It is meanwhile worth to mention that in spite of the artificial
impediments created by the Azeri side, the number of tourists
visiting the NKR steadily grows: throughout its independent history
tens of thousands of foreign citizens have already visited the NKR,
which testifies the safe and secure environment established by the
freedom-loving people of Nagorno Karabakh, and growing international
interest to the rich cultural and historical heritage of our native
land. It is essential to note that the crime rate in the NKR is one of
the lowest in Europe, and no serious accident has ever been registered
in our country with participation of a foreign citizen.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the NKR urges the authorities
of Azerbaijan to abandon counterproductive attempts to hinder visits
of foreign nationals to the NKR, and direct its energy and resources
wasted on such groundless and provocative actions towards settlement of
substantial issues between the parties to the conflict thus promoting
peace and stability for the whole fragile region of the South Caucasus.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the NKR welcomes and encourages
the visits of foreign nationals, both officials and tourists, to the
NKR. Such visits and people to people contacts in general contribute
to the creation of an atmosphere of confidence and co-operation in
the region and are essential for the international community to get
truthful and objective information about the NKR.

JUST TWO SOLITUDES MET

[ Part 2.2: “Attached Text” ]

[eng137654936918.JPG] So why did Putin visit Baku? It is obvious that
it was a stand-by visit because whatever was signed and whatever was
declared during the visit could have been done without this visit. It
is clear that Russia will continue to sell arms to Azerbaijan, it is
beyond doubt, while all the rest is done through technical talks and
arrangements. Currently Vladimir Putin and Ilham Aliyev resemble each
other. Both are having a lot of trouble in their countries, including
in oil and gas, as well as on the international arena where both are
“not understood”. Ilham Aliyev needs to strengthen his “personal”
foothold in the world, and this issue is not resolved in Russia but
probably with the help of Russia. In the present situation Moscow
hardly possesses any levers or means of operational influence to be
able to affect the situation relating to elections in Azerbaijan.

Such levers disappeared a long time ago, and they understand this
very well in Moscow, Baku and the West. At the same time, Ilham
Aliyev needs to strengthen his foothold in his relations with the
West which cannot make more or less tolerable evaluations of the
ruling regime in Azerbaijan despite the perspectives of gas supply
to Southern Europe. In universally accepted evaluations Azerbaijan
is listed under the model of the states of Central Asia which
cannot favor its leaders. However, the issue is not the regional
and political affiliation of Azerbaijan. For llham Aliyev the key
problem is his own political status and image. He needs his upcoming
election to be legitimate and evaluated by the Western community as
acceptable. Ilham Aliyev’s image has never been as suspicious as now
and has never undergone such definite evaluations before. Even the
lavishly funded authors of the United States and Europe cannot publish
anything decent about Ilham Aliyev and Azerbaijan and are limited to
“one million refugees and 20% of occupied territories”.

Staffs of leading companies in the UK and the US dealing with the
image of states, governments, politicians, told the authors that it is
impossible to publish in the respectable (or even not so respectable)
Western press something supporting the image of Azerbaijan and Ilham
Aliyev. The best publication is “economic success of Azerbaijan
impresses”, though one has to be reserved in assessments of social
development. Such environment in Azerbaijan is a lever of pressure
and control on it but most probably it is a real attitude because
the EU bodies state openly that they have no idea about how to build
further relations with Azerbaijan. It is related not only to the
internal situation in Azerbaijan but also its foreign policy which
threatens regional security and irritates the West and not only the
best but also the conventional “rivals” of the West.

In this situation Ilham Aliyev relies on the old and perhaps the
last stake – tease the West with perspectives of rapprochement with
Russia. In this case, the stake is high, and it is not worthwhile
discussing Karabakh or defense supplies, a visit is not little
but is not enough either. In other words, Ilham Aliyev chooses a
vulgar “real politics” and it was not easy for V. Putin to accept
this unexpected turn but it was accepted eventually. Why? Russia’s
twofaced, mercantile, meaningless policy has led to loss of influence
on the South Caucasus. Relations with Georgia and Armenia bode ill.

In addition, it becomes known that no one in the Russian political
leadership assumes responsibility for the current situation in the
South Caucasus and responsibility lies entirely on Putin whom they
tried to shield without success. According to Russian experts not
working for general audience, all the three (main) Russian special
services have a negative attitude to Russia’s current policy on the
South Caucasus. At the same time, they are not active in expressing
their opinion and position. The military circles in Russia are not
able to understand what is happening with the Russian policy in
the region (and not only in the region). Besides, certain political
circles in Moscow would like to re-transmit their “non-understanding”
through Armenian authors. It is all becoming increasingly obvious. The
scandalous circumstances indicate the recognition that the Russian
policy is based on conjuncture and leads nowhere and of its expected
failure. According to a leading Russian expert on international
politics, “however Russia’s policy on the South Caucasus is defined, if
one has to use the services of a Muslim state to convince a Christian
state, we are in trouble”. This time Vladimir Putin has been offered a
“golden key” from all troubles in the South Caucasus – rapprochement
with Azerbaijan and demonstration to other partners in the region
and the West the position gained in the region. However, Azerbaijan,
at least the ruling regime, understands very well that it exists not
because it is supported by Russia or Turkey but thanks to the American
“umbrella”. One non-systemic step by Ilham Aliyev is enough for the
longevity of his regime. However, Ilham Aliyev will never take that
step as it is equal to death, it will only signal to the West that it
could make several “moves” towards the degree of freedom it is allowed
to have. Moscow understands the perspectives and has idea about the
“degree of freedom” in the situation of Azerbaijan but accepted the
invitation. Nevertheless, Russia will carry on its policy, expressing
its strengths and weaknesses, at least through the expression on the
face of its leaders. The visit did not result in principal changes,
“just two solitudes met”. But the fire is not burning yet, and if it
blazes up, nobody knows who will burn more…

Igor Muradyan 10:49 15/08/2013 [footer_logo.png] Story from Lragir.am
News:

OSSETIE DU SUD-GEORGIE : LE DIALOGUE DEVIENT UNE NECESSITE (MEDVEDEV)

russie

La Georgie doit entamer les discussions avec l’Ossetie du Sud au
lieu de demander une assistance des Etats-Unis et de la Russie pour
regler le conflit regional, a declare jeudi le premier ministre russe
Medvedev dans une interview a la chaîne TV Roustavi-2.

“Le problème des relations interetatiques ne date pas d’hier. Moscou
souhaite que Tbilissi et Tskhinval se mettent a la table de
negociations et recherchent une solution pacifique au conflit”, a
indique Dmitri Medvedev en repondant a la question de savoir si la
Russie constituait un obstacle au retour des refugies georgiens en
Ossetie du Sud.

RIA Novosti

jeudi 15 août 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

JUGEMENT ERGENEKON EN TURQUIE

TURQUIE

Le 5 aoÔt, le tribunal de Silivri, près d’Istanbul, a émis son
verdict dans l’affaire Ergenekon. Il s’agissait, selon le pouvoir,
d’un complot nationaliste destiné a renverser le gouvernement
islamo-conservateur de Recep Tayyp Erdogan dans les années 2000. Une
décision aussi marquante que controversée, estime la presse turque.

Le “procès du siècle”, tel que les journaux l’ont présenté, s’est
conclu par la condamnation a la réclusion a perpétuité pour une
vingtaine de prévenus, dont plusieurs militaires de haut rang, des
journalistes et des hommes politiques de l’opposition kémaliste. Plus
de 250 autres personnes ont été condamnées a des peines de prison,
tandis que 21 ont été acquittées.

Dans le quotidien pro-gouvernemental Yeni Safak, l’éditorialiste
Abdulkadir Selvi se félicite des peines prononcées mais se demande si
“le procès Ergenekon est bien fini ?”, et si on doit en rester la.

Selvi rappelle en effet qu’en 1997, l’armée avait renversé le
gouvernement de coalition mené par le parti Refah, l’ancêtre de
l’AKP d’Erdogan. Et qu’en 2007, l’armée encore elle, avait fait une
tentative de “coup d’Etat électronique”, en publiant sur le site
de l’Etat-major une mise en garde contre l’élection attendue du
candidat de l’AKP, Abdullah Gul, a la présidence de la République :
Yeni Å~^afak, Istanbul

Il y a eu chez nous pléthore de coups d’Etats, mais par contre,
il n’y avait jamais eu de poursuites contre ces putschs. C’est ce
qui a changé aujourd’hui. En effet, la Turquie, victime des coups
d’Etat militaires, demande désormais des comptes. Dans ce contexte,
le verdict du procès Ergenekon revêt une importance historique
particulière. Mais il manque néanmoins des pièces a ce tableau. En
effet, dès lors que le général BaÅ~_bug a été condamné a la
perpétuité, ne devrait-on pas aussi juger le général Buyukanit,
qui a fait rédiger la mise en garde du 27 avril 2007, ainsi que le
général Evren [chef de la junte issue du coup d’Etat de 1980] ? Sans
parler des coups d’Etat de mai 1960 et de mars 1971. La question n’est
pas ici de juger des vieillards ou des morts, mais de punir le fait
de réaliser un coup d’Etat.

Sur le site indépendant T24, Aydin Engin explique qu’il y a
effectivement parmi les suspects jugés au procès Ergenekon des
personnes qui, afin de créer les conditions d’un véritable coup
d’Etat, avaient organisé des actions légales (par exemple des
manifestations appelant l’armée “a faire son devoir”) et illégales
(notamment l’assassinat de missionnaires chrétiens a Malatya en avril
2007, les caches d’armes ou encore l’attentat contre le Conseil d’Etat
en 2006). Il s’agit évidemment la de crimes graves qui méritaient
d’être jugés […], mais il convient aussi de voir l’autre aspect de
ce procès. En effet, la Justice turque s’est discréditée dans ce
procès par un excès de revanchisme primaire. Ainsi, en même temps
qu’étaient jugées des personnes ayant commis des crimes avérés, la
procédure contre le réseau Ergenekon a été sérieusement entachée
par des procès d’intention, par le procès d’une facon de penser.

Le quotidien kémaliste Cumhuriyet, dont l’un des journalistes, Mustafa
Balbay a été condamné a trente-quatre ans et huit mois de prison,
considère d’ailleurs que ce procès n’est qu’une revanche politique,
orchestrée par le gouvernement AKP.

Dans Vatan enfin, l’écrivain et éditorialiste Zulfu Livanelli, ancien
détenu politique et exilé dans les années 1970, dénonce également
un verdict “qui a frappé bon nombre d’innocents, condamnés sur la
base de témoignages anonymes et d’affirmations jamais prouvées”,
ce qui “jette une ombre terrible sur le verdict” : Vatan, Istanbul

” La justice n’a pas été faite, car des innocents ont été punis a
côté des coupables. J’espère que les juges de la Cour de Cassation
rétabliront la Justice”.

jeudi 15 aoÔt 2013, Stéphane ©armenews.com

RAPT DES PILOTES TURCS : ANKARA EVOQUE DES REPERCUSSIONS NEGATIVES SUR LES RELATIONS LIBANO-TURQUES

LIBAN

Le ministre demissionnaire des Affaires etrangères, Adnane Mansour,
a recu un appel telephonique de son homologue turc, Ahmet Davutoglu,
qui lui a fait part de sa “grande inquietude quant aux repercussions
negatives du rapt des pilotes turcs sur les relations bilaterales”
libano-turques, rapporte l’Agence nationale d’information (ANI,
officielle). Le diplomate turc a appele les autorites libanaises a
oeuvrer pour la liberation des deux pilotes enleves vendredi sur la
route de l’aeroport.

De son côte, Adnane Mansour a assure que le Liban refuse tout
enlèvement opere sur son territoire, assurant que les autorites font
tout leur possible pour liberer les pilotes de la Turkish Airlines.

Alors que M. Davutoglu a reitere que son pays n’est pas implique
dans l’enlèvement des pèlerins libanais a Aazaz, M. Mansour a espere
qu’Ankara deploie des efforts afin de trouver une solution a cette
affaire qui remonte a plus d’un an.

Un groupuscule se faisant appeler “Les pèlerins de l’imam Rida”
avait revendique, vendredi, l’enlèvement des pilotes turcs. Dans
un message diffuse par la chaîne de television al-Jadeed, mais dont
l’authenticite n’a pu etre confirmee, les ravisseurs ont demande aux
autorites turques la liberation des pèlerins chiites contre celle
des pilotes.

jeudi 15 août 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

EU CALLS FOR PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Aug 14 2013

14 August 2013, 12:31 (GMT+05:00)
By Sara Rajabova

The world’s most influential international organizations and countries
call for the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,
emerged upon Armenia’s territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
Catherine Ashton’s spokesperson Maja Kocijancic told Trend news agency
that the European Union stresses the importance of finding a peaceful
settlement to conflicts in the South Caucasus and calls for strong
commitment by all concerned parties in this respect.

Kocijancic pointed out the EU’s support the mediation efforts of the
OSCE Minsk Group, including recent statements by the Presidents of
the Minsk Group Chair countries urging the leaders of all the sides
to recommit to the Helsinki principles, particularly those relating
to the non-use of force or the threat of force, territorial integrity,
and equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

She also noted that the EU supports appeals to avoid actions or
rhetoric that could raise tension in the region and lead to escalation
of the conflict.

The EU stands ready to provide enhanced support for confidence
building measures, in support of and in full complementarity with the
Minsk Group, with the view to facilitating further steps towards the
implementation of peace, Kocijancic emphasized.

She added the EU believes that the strengthened relations between
the EU and the three countries in the South Caucasus have opened new
avenues and opportunities for the EU to support conflict settlement
efforts in the region.

The EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus will continue
to play a significant role in this regard, Kocijancic said.

For over two decades, Azerbaijan and Armenia have been locked in
conflict which emerged over Armenia’s territorial claims against its
South Caucasus neighbor. Since a war in the early 1990s, Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s territory,
including Nagorno-Karabakh and seven surrounding regions. A fragile
ceasefire has been in place since 1994, but long-standing efforts by
US, Russian and French mediators have been largely fruitless so far.

Armenia has not yet implemented the U.N. Security Council’s four
resolutions on its pullout from the neighboring country’s territories.

Peace talks aimed at resolving the long-standing conflict, mediated by
Russia, France and the U.S. through the OSCE Minsk Group, are underway
on the basis of a peace outline proposed by the Minsk Group co-chairs
and dubbed the Madrid Principles. The negotiations have been largely
fruitless so far.

ARMENIA: DO MOST YOUNG PEOPLE WANT TO LEAVE FOR GOOD?

EurasiaNet.org
Aug 14 2013

August 14, 2013 – 10:12am, by Giorgi Lomsadze

Almost 80 percent of young Armenians surveyed in a recent poll say
they’d leave their country if they get the chance, with 36 percent
saying they’d leave for good. Their desire, uncovered by the Armenian
chapter of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), jives with
other recent research, and further stokes long-standing survival
fears within Armenia.

“It is clear that the migration process poses risks for our country…

by taking away young people, who are full of energy and are in
their reproductive age,” said Gagik Hayrapetian, UNFPA’s assistant
representative in Armenia, speaking at an August 12 news conference
dedicated to International Youth Day.

In 2012, 49,600 Armenian citizens left the country of 2.97 million
people for good, according to official data, but many locals speculate
that the real number could be still higher. Coupled with one of
the world’s lower birth rates, high numbers of young people longing
to seek greener pastures abroad may not augur well for the future,
many Armenians fear.

The poll questioned 1,200 Armenian citizens between the ages of 18
and 30.

Many young Armenians are pessimistic about their education or career
options at home, according to the findings of a report by the Armenian
UN Association. Their strong desire to study abroad creates fertile
soil for an eventually permanent emigration, the report found.

While Armenia’s struggling economy is often considered the main cause
of migration, the report argues that many other factors come into play,
too, including marriage.

Armenians, who tend not to get married before they hit 30, tend to be
less enthusiastic about tying the knot. Economic considerations are
the main stopper for men, while women tend to be more concerned about
what marriage could mean for their ability to live their own lives.

Counter to traditional norms, a growing number of women are saying
that career matters more for them than starting a family and that after
marriage they would not want to live with their parents or in-laws.

While the Armenian government long has struggled with these trends
— its population numbers are considered a toss-up for accuracy —
little progress appears to have been made. A poll run this spring
by Gallup found that 40 percent of a less age-specific Armenia-based
sample also wanted to leave the country for good.

While this latest sample size is relatively limited, it points to a
trend. How to reconcile such findings with what prospects Armenia can
realistically offer the young — eventual closer integration with
the European Union, for instance — should prove a topic to keep
officials up late at night, analysts say.

RUSSIA TO PROMOTE POLITICAL SETTLEMENT OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH PROBLEM – PUTIN

ITAR-TASS, Russia
August 13, 2013 Tuesday 08:16 PM GMT+4

BAKU August 13

– Russia will do its best to promote settlement of the Nagorn-Karabakh
problem, which must be settled by diplomatic efforts only, Russian
President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday after talks with his
Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev.

“Naturally, during our talks, we touched upon pressing international
problems, including that of Nagorno-Karabakh,” Putin said. “Russia
is taking active efforts to promote the soonest settlement of the
conflict, which is possible only through political means.”

The Azerbaijani president also noted the role Russia as a co-chair
of the OSCE Minsk group was playing in the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh problem. “The soonest settlement of the conflict
will lead to stability, predictability and cooperation in the region,”
he said.

According to Aliyev, the settlement of the conflict must be based “on
historical justice, international law and resolutions of international
organizations.”

Lasting ceasefire has been established in Nagorno-Karabakh since
May 1994, thanks to Russia’s mediatory efforts. As a co-chair of the
Minsk group, Russia is continuing its participation in the negotiating
process to settle the conflict. On November 2, 2008, a three-party
meeting in Moscow between presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia
yielded a declaration, where the parties reiterated their commitment
to the political settlement.