Author: Kanayan Tamar

Ex-leader Kocharian votes for `Armenia’s future’

May 6, 2012 – 14:08 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – At May 6 parliamentary elections, the 2nd Armenian
President cast his ballot in Malatiya -Sebastiya community’s polling
station.

As Robert Kocharian told journalists, he voted for the future of
Armenia. `I had my glasses on – so my choice was a right one,’ he
said.

Asked to comment on the possibility of his return to power, he
questioned, `do you want me at power? `

The ex-leader also refused to comment on his plans to run for president in 2013.

Parliamentary elections kicked off in Armenia. Citizens will elect 131
MPs of the next convocation of the National Assembly, with 90 of them
running by proportional system and 41- by the majority system.

On May 6, 8 am, 1982 constituencies opened in the republic, where
2.484.003 registered voters may cast their votes for the electoral
lists, as well as parliamentary candidates nominated by the majority
system.

Parliamentary elections feature 8 political parties, Republican Party
of Armenia (RPA), Prosperous Armenia, ARF Dashnaktsutyun (ARFD),
Orinats Yerkir, Heritage, Democratic Party of Armenia (DPA), Communist
Party of Armenia and United Armenians party, as well as one election
bloc represented by opposition Armenian National Congress (ANC).

Armenian National Congress (ANC) must overcome 7% threshold as a bloc,
unlike the parties, which need 5% threshold level.

647 international and over 31 thous. local observers will monitor the
parliamentary elections in Armenia. OSCE/ODIHR (258 observers), OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly (69), PACE (37), CIS Interparliamentary
Assembly (22), as well as International Foundation for Electoral
Systems (IFES) and SILBA international organization have deployed
observer missions in Armenia.

The preliminary results will be published no later than 24 hours after
the voting, with final results to be released on the seventh day
starting the voting day.

1 Top stories

CHOUCHI
Exposition de tableaux consacrée au 20e anniversaire de la libération de Chouchi

A l’occasion du 20e anniversaire de la libération de Chouchi du joug
de l’occupant azéri, une exposition d’une centaine de tableaux fut
inaugurée hier 5 mai à l’Union des peintres d’Arménie à Erévan. Les
peintures représentent la libération de Chouchi par les forces
arméniennes réalisées par des peintres professionnels et amateurs.
L’exposition qui a accueilli plusieurs centaines de visiteurs se
tiendra jusqu’au 15 mai.

Krikor Amirzayan

dimanche 6 mai 2012,
Krikor Amirzayan ©armenews.com

PRÉSIDENTIELLE FRANCE
Qui que ce soit le négationnisme ne passera pas

RECONNAÎTRE * COMMÉMORER * CONDAMNER * RÉPARER
Cette Marianne est le symbole de la justice. La foule qui se range
derrière elle est formée par des Khatchkars, des stèles en pierre en
forme de croix, symbolisant un million et demi de victimes ne pouvant
plus parler.

Seules leurs mes peuvent prier pour la justice

Tableau de Liana et textes de son frère Davit (Erevan)

cliquer sur l’image pour agrandir – Click on picture to enlarge (Mac
double click)

Marianne symbolise tous les vivants qui demandent justice. Ils se
battent pour elle et pour la défense des Droits de l’Homme. Parce que
la justice est le principe moral fondamental à la base de la
civilisation démocratique, la seule capable de sauver TOUS les Etats
et les nations des tragédies et des désastres.

Marianne soulève le symbole de la justice sur toute la planète. C’est
la raison pour laquelle Marianne est Juste !

Résultat France 2 en direct 20h – Result on France 2 TV live 8:00 PM
(France) ICI-HERE

dimanche 6 mai 2012,
Jean Eckian ©armenews.com

NEGATIONNISME-USA
La justice rejette la plainte turque contre l’université du Minnesota

Une cour d’appel fédérale a jugé jeudi que l’Université du Minnesota
ne pouvait être poursuivie en justice parce que le site internet de
l’un de ses centres de recherche avait qualifié un site internet d’une
association turque de « non fiable ».

Les publications du site de l’Université du Minnesota sont protégées
par la loi, qu’elles soient considérées comme une vérité ou comme une
opinion, dit le jugement rendu par la cour d’appel fédérale de la 8
ème circonscription.

Le site poursuivi était celui du Center for Holocaust and Genocide
Studies qui qualifie le massacre des Arméniens en 1915 de génocide. La
plainte déposée par l’association turque « Turkish Coalition of
America » se fondait sur le fait que l’Université avait qualifié son
site internet de « peu fiable ».

Cette plainte avait été suivie de près par les historiens spécialistes
de la période mais aussi par les chercheurs préoccupés par la liberté
académique en général, certains d’entre eux craignant un dangereux
précédent au cas où l’Université aurait été condamnée sur la liberté
d’exprimer ses points de vue dans le domaine de la connaissance. Le
Middle East Studies Association a par exemple appellé la Turkish
Coalition of America à retirer sa plainte.

L’ironie de l’affaire est que le qualificatif de `peu fiable’ a été
retiré du site de l’université peu de temps après les critiques de la
Turkish Coalition of America mais avant le lancement de la procédure
judiciaire en 2010. Les responsables de l’université avaient justifié
leur geste en expliquant qu’ils ne voulaient pas faire la promotion de
sites négationnistes. Toutefois l’université a défendu le droit du
centre de recherche d’avoir cette liste et toute la décision de la
cour d’appel est prise comme si l’université avait conservé en ligne
ces informations.

L’an dernier un tribunal fédéral de district avait déjà statué que la
liberté académique de l’université prévalait mais la Turkish Coalition
of America a interjeté appel.

La cour d’appel fédérale a rejeté les arguments de l’appel lancé par
la Turkish Coalition of America affirmant que l’université avait violé
ses droits du Premier amendement et diffamé le site web. L’argument
central de la Turkish Coalition of America était que les étudiants de
l’université se verraient refuser l’accès aux idées de la Turkish
Coalition of America et donc que le libre échange des idées a été
entravé lorsqu’un centre d’une université a étiqueté le site de « peu
fiable ». Sur la question du Premier amendement la Turkish Coalition
of America a cité des décisions judiciaires dans lesquelles par
exemple les écoles secondaires ont violé les droits du Premier
amendement des étudiants en supprimant certains livres de la
bibliothèque. La cour d’appel a noté que ces cas étaient basés sur un
blocage de l’accès à l’information ce que l’université du Minnesota
n’a jamais fait.

« Il n’est pas allégué que les défendeurs ont entravé l’accès des
élèves au site de la Turkish Coalition of America » indique la
décision de la cour.

L’appel de la Turkish Coalition of America indique également que le
site web de l’université a diffamé la Turkish Coalition of America en
disant qu’il est engagé dans la négation du génocide arménien en le
qualifiant de « peu fiable » et en disant que c’est « un étrange
mélange de faits et d’opinions » et qu’il est « une source illégitime
d’information ».

La Turkish Coalition of America a argué que l’étiquetage de son site
web comme d’un site négationniste est diffamant parce que le terme de
« négationnisme » dans le contexte d’une étude d’un génocide «
implique la négation de faits bien documentés sous adjacente à un
évènement génocidaire ».

La cour d’appel a estimé que la question est de savoir si le site de
la Turkish Coalition of America nie le génocide arménien. « Parce que
le site de la Turkish Coalition of America affirme qu’en l’état il est
très peu probable qu’une accusation de génocide puisse être intentée
contre le gouvernement ottoman ou son successeur » fondée sur une
preuve historique la déclaration du centre dans le cadre de cette
interprétation est bonne et par conséquent qu’elle n’est pas
préjudiciable » précise le jugement.

« Les trois autres déclarations peuvent être interpréter
raisonnablement comme des opinions subjectives plutôt que des faits »
conclu la décision qui rejette l’accusation de diffamation.

dimanche 6 mai 2012,
Stéphane ©armenews.com

US Court rejects claims of Turkish Coalition of America

news.am
May 05, 2012 | 23:56

The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Minnesota University
in a closely watched case involving First Amendment and academic
freedom claims.

The plaintiff in the case, Turkish Coalition of America, claimed that
statements on a university department website that suggested that the
Turkish Coalition’s information about the Armenian Genocide was
`unreliable’ violated its free speech rights and were defamatory.

Earlier U.S. District Court Judge Donovan Frank dismissed a lawsuit
filed by the Turkish Coalition of America against the University of
Minnesota.

The Court of Appeals found that the Turkish Coalition’s defamation
claims failed because the university faculty’s statements were either
true or were statements of opinion, which cannot support a defamation
claim, says the statement posted on university’s website.

The case has been watched closely by scholars around the United States
and the world because of its implications for principles of academic
freedom.

Trend, Azerbaijan
May 5 2012

Azerbaijani FM considers Uruguayan counterpart’s statement

Azerbaijan, Baku, May 5 / Trend S. Agayeva /

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry is considering Uruguayan Foreign
Minister’s statement, Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry official
representative Elman Abdullayev told media in Baku today.

Uruguay supports the peaceful settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
on the basis of the right of nations to self-determination. According
to the Armenian media, Uruguayan Foreign Minister Luis Almagro said
this at a joint press conference with his Armenian counterpart Edward
Nalbandian in Yerevan on May 4.

“Nagorno Karabakh is closely related to Armenia,” the minister said.
“This is Karabakh’s future, which it can choose for itself, using the
right to self-determination.”

“The Azerbaijani Embassy in Argentina has been charged with
considering the position of Uruguayan Foreign Minister and the
reliability of the information disseminated by the Armenian media,”
Abdullaev said.

He added that afterwards, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry will make
an official statement.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 per cent of Azerbaijan since 1992,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.
Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a c
easefire agreement in 1994. The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group –
Russia, France and the U.S. – are currently holding peace
negotiations.

Armenia has not yet implemented the U.N. Security Council’s four
resolutions on the liberation of the Nagorno-Karabakh and the
surrounding regions.

Trend, Azerbaijan
May 5 2012

Section 907 loses relevance to Azerbaijan, top official says

Azerbaijan, Baku, May 5 / Trend E. Mehdiyev /

Azerbaijan has been trying for 20 years to inform the U.S political
planning centers and all bodies carrying out state policy, that
Azerbaijan’s rights were violated in the issue of Section 907,
Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Social and Political
Department Chief Ali Hasanov told media today.

He reminded that Section 907 of the United States Freedom Support Act
was injustice against Azerbaijan

“Section 907 was adopted against Azerbaijan in 1992 under the Armenian
lobby’s pressure and it should be abolished,” he said. “By its
activity over the past period, Azerbaijan proved that this decision
has been indeed taken unjustly. Azerbaijan did not hold Armenia in the
blockade. Armenia has put itself in the blockade. Armenia occupied the
territory between Azerbaijan and Armenia.”

“For now the section has lost its relevance to Azerbaijan,” he stressed.

“We do not expect any financial and economic assistance from the U.S,”
he said. “We do not need it. Azerbaijan and the U.S are equal
partners. If the political planning centers of this country think that
abolishing Section 907 is in the interests of the U.S, they will
cancel it. Otherwise, we will not insist on this. We do not need to
receive any grants from the U.S as part of Section 907.”

The U.S. Congress adopted the Freedom Support Act in October 1992 to
regulate rendering state aid to former Soviet republics. According to
Section 907 of the law, the U.S. government was forbidden to assist
Azerbaijani official bodies. Section 907 has been suspended by the
U.S. president since 2002 on an annual basis in accordance with his
powers given by the Congress in 2001.

Trend, Azerbaijan
May 5 2012

Presidency in UN Security Council to allow Azerbaijan to raise issue
of executing UNSC resolutions on occupation of Azerbaijani
territories, top official says

Azerbaijan, Baku, May 5 / Trend E. Mehdiyev, A. Akhundov /

The presidency in the UN Security Council (UNSC) gives Azerbaijan
additional opportunities to raise the issue of executing the UN
Security Council resolutions on the occupation of Azerbaijani
territories by Armenia which have not been implemented yet,
Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Social and Political
Department Chief Ali Hasanov told media today.

“Azerbaijan’s monthly presidency in the Security Council, chaired by
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, started yesterday,” he said. “The
presidency will pass to Azerbaijan again for a month in accordance
with the schedule in September 2013. First, electing and presidency in
the Security Council is a pleasant fact for Azerbaijan. We perceive
this as an expression of the world community’s confidence in
Azerbaijan.”

“Azerbaijan must justify this confidence,” he said.

“Azerbaijan must take part in objective resolving the global problems,
and objectively relate to the events taking place in the world,” he
said. “The country must strive for the UN to choose the best way,
adhere to the norms of international law. One of the examples of
violating these rules is the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Azerbaijan
continues making its efforts to resolve more than 20 years. The
presidency in the UN Security Council gives Azerbaijan additional
opportunities to raise the issue of executing the UN unfulfilled
resolutions concerning the occupation of Azerbaijani territories by
Armenia and to develop the mechanisms to prevent these incidents in
the future.”

AzeriReport
May 4 2012

Matthew Bryza: President Aliyev is Popular Beyond of Anyone Else

WASHINGTON, DC. May 4, 2012: Is Matthew Bryza too optimistic about Azerbaijan?

On May 2, just three days after the US Senate received White House
notification that President Obama has withdrawn the nomination of
Matthew Bryza for the US Ambassador to Azerbaijan position, the
Illinois diplomat, who moved to Turkey right after returning from
Baku, showed-up in Washington DC- based Jamestown Foundation and
criticized the Administration’s current South Caucasus policy, TURAN’s
Washington, DC correspondent Alakbar Raufoglu reports.

`I know that everybody here in the US Government thinks that we’re
focusing on the South Caucasus issues and all of our priorities, but
the countries in the region don’t feel that. They feel very much
drift’, Bryza said in front of Washington’s think-tank and diplomatic
community.

Especially, he slammed the Administration’s latest efforts on ignoring
Azerbaijan, while implementing the rapprochement policy between Turkey
and Armenia.

`This (Turkey-Armenia) normalization would be great if it’s
achievable. But it’s not achievable and plus it negatively influences
Nagorno-Karabakh peace process’, he mentioned adding, `No matter how
much we wanted Armenia-Turkey rapprochement, instead we’ve got
nothing’.

On Nagorno-Karabakh, Bryza emphasized that no peace agreement is
expected until the US government takes this process at `very senior
level’.

The Azeri government `will not launch military operations until it
fully loses its confidence to the peace process’.
In the meanwhile, he emphasized that the risks of the military
conflict are increases.

For years, he added, `we’ve talked about three senses of strategic
interests in South Caucasus: Security, energy and the internal
reforms. They all are important to be followed if the US doesn’t want
to lose this region’.

At the same time, while speaking about democracy in Azerbaijan, Mr.
Bryza mentioned that `the situation is not as bad as many things. `But
it’s certainly not so bad so to write it off’.

`There is no chance for any Arab uprisings in Azerbaijan now.
President Aliyev is popular beyond of anyone else’, he stressed.
According to Bryza, there are lots of senior people and young people
in Azerbaijan who are ready to make the system better, There are
efforts on the way’.

The current president, he adds, `intends to develop the country by
using the oil incomes’. Therefore, unlike the Arab spring countries,
youth in Azerbaijan `thinks that if they go to the streets, they will
lose everything, especially the current opportunity that the country
achieves’.

Bryza’s statement on democracy came while answering the question of
Daniel Fried, his former boss at the State Department, who is
currently leading the Obama Administration’s Guantanamo Bay policy at
the State Department. In his question, Mr. Fried mentioned the
oligarchs in Azerbaijan, asking whether the US Administration
addresses the democratic reforms in Azerbaijan.
Mr. Bryza also talked about the regional threats, mentioning the
Iranian government `up to terrible things towards Azerbaijan’. He
said, the Azeri government is `totally against the Iranian war, it
will bring a huge humanitarian and social “destroy to Azerbaijan’.
`There is a huge gap in the US Administration now regarding what is
happening between Iran and South Caucasus’, he added.
After the Jamestown event, TURAN’s Washington DC correspondent
interviewed Ambassador Bryza regarding his speech.

Question: I assume after your today’s speech, many democrats in Baku
will question whether Ambassador Bryza is trying to advocate for Azeri
government’s policy in Washington DC, or as a former senior diplomat,
is trying to pressure the Democrat Administration not to let
relationship with Azerbaijan to get out of track? Which of these is
true?

Answer: None of them. I’m an independent person. I exist on my own
right now, Im a private business person, and Im an independent
academic heading a think-tank in Tallinn, Estonia, The International
center for Defense Studies, so these sorts of events are new for me,
and it’s amazing that I can just say what I think (laugh).

So I’m saying what I think. I was very proud to develop a US policy
towards Azerbaijan that reflected our government’s views, but my views
too, I believe in them, so if my views sound similar to the US policy;
this is because I believe in them.

Question: You called on the US administration to take the Karabakh
negotiations on a very senior level. Does that mean that we should
expect meetings on the presidents level hosted by the White House,
just same as the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations?

Answer: No, not at all. I don’t think that’s realistic. I don’t think
we are ever going to get that sort of level top participation, like
President Clinton offered in the case of Middle East peace process. I
think, number one, it’s not healthy if the Minsk group Co-Chairs has
the president involved at that level, it just creates an imbalance.
And, number two, I think we are stuck in the process now unless the
two presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia feel trust toward each other.
And I don’t believe trust will evolve organically, I think that has to
be generated somehow. And I think that’s a natural role for the United
States, and if the US doesn’t do that, Russia won’t do that, France
won’t do that, and so who else is going to do that within the Minsk
group co-chair countries? Nobody. So I think it’s up to us to do that.

Question: Truly, why President Medvedev, or years ago then-President
Shirak can do it and president Obama can’t? Is that what you expect
from him?

Answer: I don’t believe President Obama will get involved, I don’t
anticipate that. But Secretary Clinton is ready to be involved more,
and in our bilateral diplomacy with Russia the issue of facilitating
and not manipulating Nagorno-Karabakh peace process should be an
agenda item. In other words, the profile of Nagorno-Karabakh
settlement process needs to be elevated on our diplomatic agenda, on
the level of the Secretary of State, and sometimes, the President.

Question: I want to take you back to the Congressional hearings on
your Ambassador nomination two years ago, when some here in
Washington, DC were concerned if Ambassador Bryza, being a close
friend to the Azeri government, will be ignored in Baku when it comes
to addressing issues like democracy, human rights and other problems
in the country. Do you think the Azeri government was listening to
you?

Answer: I do think they did because of the initiatives that we
launched. My approach is not to lecture to them; my approach is to try
to look at the situation the way it is, to identify what the real
obstacles are, which to me the oligarchy concentration of power is,
and then figure out the realistic ways to change that situation.

It’s impossible to do by flipping a switch or releasing a statement,
it’s only possible by working day after day with people with authority
to win their trust. And to convince them that our goal is not to
overthrow the government of Azerbaijan, and to convince them that we
didn’t launch the uprisings in the broader Middle East and we don’t
want them in Azerbaijan. And also to convince them that they need,
they must move forward on these reforms, or else in the long run they
can’t succeed.

And so with that least to them is the opportunity to define success
jointly with the government of Azerbaijan through realistic,
achievable steps, and there are many ways for doing that. I started up
a dialog forum between society leaders or presidential administration,
or was about to start it and I had to go. We were working in other
spheres, attempting legal reforms; advancing electronic government to
fight corruption, new code for fighting corruption as well,
competition code to make sure economy is more open. There are many
specific ways to do it, and they are listening!

Question: It will be unfair if I don’t ask you about Ambassador
Richard Morningstar, what do you think of President Obama’s
nomination?

Answer: He is fantastic; he is unbelievably the best possible choice.
He knows the country, he knows the region, he is a strategic thinker,
and he cares very much about Azerbaijan.

Question: And what are the main challenges in front of him?

Answer: You know what they are. They are the same ones I’ve been
working on, the whole reform agenda we were just talking about,
helping the government of Azerbaijan work with its allies and friends
in Turkey and Europe to finalize the gas transit through Turkey, and
help the parties figure out what the next export directions are going
to be. Also to support the Minsk Group and advance our work in
fighting proliferation, security in the Caspian Sea, sustain the
transportation from Afghanistan as well.
Question: Some argue that Morningstar is energy oriented…

Answer: Well, I was told to be energy oriented as well

(Contact.az).

Khaleej Times, UAE
May 5 2012

Balloon blasts injure 140 at Armenia rally

(AFP) / 5 May 2012

More than 140 people were injured on Friday when gas-filled balloons
exploded at a governing party campaign concert in the Armenian capital
ahead of parliamentary polls.
The emergencies ministry said 144 people suffered burns when scores of
promotional balloons burst into flames at a concert staged by
President Serzh Sarkisian’s Republican party in Yerevan’s central
Republic Square.

Armenian Internet sites showed a fireball rising into the air and
chaotic images of people screaming in confusion and anger.

`The balloons exploded and caught fire after people holding the
bunches released them from their hands into the air,’ a witness told
AFP.

It was not immediately clear what caused the explosions although
police said they were looking into various potential reasons including
the `improper storage of flammable substances’.

`All the victims had either medium or light injuries. Now doctors are
trying to revive them from shock,’ Health Minister Harutiun Kushkian
told reporters.

The promotional balloons were decorated with the governing party’s
election slogan `Let’s believe in change’.

The incident marred a largely calm election campaign and President
Sarkisian promised a full investigation.

`I urge everyone to keep calm. Let us pray for all the victims and
wish them a quick recovery,’ he said in a statement.

Sarkisian’s party has been tipped by opinion polls to triumph in
Sunday’s election ahead of its ruling coalition rival, the Prosperous
Armenia party led by a wealthy former arm wrestling champion.

The vote is the biggest test of the ex-Soviet state’s democratic
credentials since disputed presidential elections in 2008, when mass
rallies ended in bloody clashes between riot police and opposition
supporters that left 10 people dead, casting a shadow over Sarkisian’s
administration.

The authorities in the mountainous country of 3.3 million people have
promised an unprecedentedly clean contest for the 131-seat National
Assembly in the hope of avoiding further political turmoil.

Opposition parties however have questioned the validity of the opinion
polls and threatened demonstrations if there are mass falsifications.