Author: Kanayan Tamar

ARMENIAN SIRANUSH VARDANYAN BECOMES LEADER AT ICANN REGIONAL DEPARTMENT

YEREVAN, July 15. /ARKA/. Armenia’s representative Siranush Vardanyan
became a leader in the regional department of the ICANN, vice-chairman
of Internet Society NGO Grigory Saghyan said after his return from
ICANN international conference in London.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
is the private sector, non-profit corporation created in 1998. It
brings together individuals, industry, non-commercial and government
representatives to discuss, debate and develop policies about the
technical coordination of the Internet’s Domain Name System.

The 50th ICANN meeting was held in London on June 22-26.

Armenian Siranush Vardanyan has been appointed as vice head of a
committee at ICANN regional department and it is a great achievement
for Armenia, Saghyan said. Armenia is in the Asian-Pacific region
according to ICANN definitions, he said.

Siranush Vardanyan was coordinator of Project Harmony in Armenia from
2000 to 2008. -0–

– See more at:

THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY MUST REQUIRE AN ANSWER FROM AZERBAIJAN AUTHORITIES

July 14 2014

Davit Harutyunyan about James Warlick’s statement “Today, I’m leaving
for Washington to meet with the OSCE co-chairs to discuss the next
steps of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict peaceful settlement. The status quo
is becoming increasingly dangerous,” recently such a post was made by
OSCE Minsk Group American Co-Chair James Warlick on Twitter. Aravot.am
asked the Minister-Chief of RA Government Staff, Davit Harutyunyan,
how dangerous the status quo is, and why the co-chairs were still
considering the maintenance of the status quo an achievement, but
now they see a threat in it. “The status quo is violated by Azerbaijan.

Any violations and abuses of status quo, of course, is dangerous. But
they are dangerous for both sides, and I would not want any one
perceive it as a threat directed towards Armenia,” said Davit
Harutyunyan, adding that it is also dangerous the armed forces
standing on both sides of the border. As for changing the status
quo, our interlocutor noted, “Changing the status quo is not an end
in itself. Properly solving this conflict is an end in itself.” By
saying “properly,” Davit Harutyunyan is referring to the three most
important principles that have long been known and accepted by the
co-chairs as a guideline. Recently, in Russian political circles,
rumors about deployment of peacekeepers on Karabakh-Azerbaijani contact
line have been re-activated. Davit Harutyunyan, currently, does not
see this kind of problem. Moreover. “This is actually a solution to
demarche of one side, and I do not think that any demarche should
be solved exactly in this way. I think that it would be correct for
the international community to intensify the demand of the answer
to these three questions from Azerbaijan authorities.” Recently,
Director General of EurAsEC institute, Vladimir Lepyokhin, announced
that the American side, using the Karabakh conflict, is trying to
create a chaotic situation in Armenia. To the question of Aravot.am
of whether there is something like this, the Minister-chief of RA
Government Staff said, “At least, I have never felt an attempt of
creating chaos in Armenia by someone. Even if such attempts are made
by anybody, I do not think that our society does not realize it and
its danger for the security of Armenia and Karabakh.” To the question
of how possible the resumption of hostilities in Karabakh-Azerbaijani
contact line is in geopolitical developments with an intention to
solve the issue unilaterally, Davit Harutyunyan said that he does not
consider the resumption of large-scale military actions possible, but
it does not mean that we should not be ready for it. “Being prepared
makes the possibility of it zero.”

NELLY GRIGORYAN

Read more at:

THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH DISPUTE: THEN AND NOW – STRATFOR

12:20 * 15.07.14

Below is Stratfor’s latest report regarding the land dispute over
Nagorno-Karabakh

Summary

There has been a burst of diplomatic activity in recent months over
the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which Armenia and Azerbaijan have
disputed for decades. Russia, the strongest power in the Caucasus,
has become more engaged in the issue in light of Azerbaijan’s growing
leverage in the region, raising the possibility of a shift in this
conflict. It is the changing positions of larger regional players such
as Russia,Turkey, Iran and the United States, more so than Azerbaijan
and Armenia themselves, that will drive the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
in the months and years to come.

Analysis

As Russia and the West continue their confrontation over Ukraine,
there is a subtler yet potentially equally significant competition
occurring in the Caucasus. While Georgia attempts to move closer
to the West andArmenia strengthens ties with Russia, Azerbaijan has
attempted to maintain a careful balance between the two sides.

Azerbaijan thus serves as the pivot of the Caucasus, and the dispute
over Nagorno-Karabakh is a crucial aspect in shaping Baku’s role.

The Historical Backdrop for the Conflict

Nagorno-Karabakh is a small yet strategic piece of territory located
in the center of the South Caucasus region. Despite its small size
(4,400 square kilometers, or about 1,700 square miles) and population
(fewer than 150,000 people), Nagorno-Karabakh historically has been
an ethnically and religiously mixed region because of its mountainous
terrain and location at a crossroads between continents, although
the population now is over 95 percent Armenian.

Nagorno-Karabakh, along with much of the rest of the Caucasus, was
contested by the Ottoman Turks and Persians for hundreds of years. The
emergence of the Russian Empire as a major player in the Caucasus
during the 18th century culminated in Russia’s annexation of the
region, including Nagorno-Karabakh, in the early 19th century. The
Russian Empire would be the dominant power in the region until the
Russian Revolution of 1905 weakened the empire and the subsequent
revolution of 1917 brought about its collapse.

Both of these periods marked significant turbulence in the Caucasus
culminating in a war over control of Nagorno-Karabakh and the
wider region in the midst of a vacuum created by Russian weakness
and distraction. By 1921, the Bolsheviks had taken over the entire
region, and the Caucasus was incorporated into the Soviet Union as the
Transcaucasian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic in 1922. The Soviet
republic was then reorganized in 1923 into three separate republics:
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Nagorno-Karabakh was placed under
the jurisdiction of the Azerbaijani Soviet Republic by then-Soviet
Nationalities Commissioner Josef Stalin. This redrawing of borders and
territorial lines, which were designed to create territorial disputes
among the republics in order to keep them weak, set in motion the
conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.

With the introduction of the glasnost and perestroika movements in the
late Soviet period and the easing of public discourse and political
participation, Nagorno-Karabakh became one of the first and highest
profile issues to come under dispute. Starting in February 1988,
numerous public demonstrations were held in the Armenian capital
of Yerevan supporting the incorporation of the majority-Armenian
Nagorno-Karabakh into the Soviet Republic of Armenia. Next, the
Nagorno-Karabakh Oblast Committee of the Communist Party held an
unprecedented unofficial referendum to rejoin Armenia. Azerbaijan
appealed to Moscow to condemn such actions, but when Moscow’s response
was slow and not to Baku’s liking, ethnic violence erupted against
Armenians in Azerbaijan and against Azerbaijanis in Armenia.

This violence quickly spread into a full-scale military confrontation
in which all Azerbaijanis were expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh, leading
to the territory’s current Armenian-dominated ethnic balance. Armenian
forces decisively defeated Azerbaijan in the conflict, leading to
the de facto independence of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenian control
of several provinces abutting Nagorno-Karabakh as a corridor into the
region. After mediation by numerous external players including Russia,
Turkey and Iran, a cease-fire was reached to end the conflict in 1994.

Geopolitical Alignments and the Elusiveness of Peace

With an end to the war, a formal peace process was launched by the
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe in 1994, with
Russia, the United States and France serving as co-chairs along with
Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, 20 years and countless meetings
and summits later, there has been no substantial progress made on
a diplomatic solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. There are
fundamental geopolitical drivers for why this is the case.

First and foremost is the participation and influence of regional
power players in the conflict. Russia, Turkey and Iran have competed
in the Caucasus for centuries, and this continues to be the case. The
participation of these countries, with their entrenched and often
competing strategic interests, has been a significant component to
the protracted dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh.

During the war in the 1980s, each country played complicated and
sometimes contradictory roles. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan employed
mercenaries during the Nagorno-Karabakh war, with fighters from Russia
(including Chechnya), Turkey and Iran participating on both sides of
the conflict. These countries also become involved in a more official
capacity, with Turkey and Iran supplying personnel for training the
Azerbaijani military, while Russia provided weapons, supplies and
training for both sides. Notably, the war began while the Soviet Union
was still nominally intact, putting Moscow in a very complex position.

Soviet leaders initially responded to the conflict between Armenia
and Azerbaijan in a law enforcement capacity as a means of restoring
order, but the Soviet Union’s internal weaknesses and divisions
prevented definitive action from being taken to ameliorate tensions
or overwhelmingly support either side.

The result was sporadic Soviet assistance to both sides, whether
weapons for Armenia or tactical training for Azerbaijani soldiers.

However, Moscow’s support of Armenia grew once the Soviet Union had
officially ceased to exist and the Russian Federation emerged.

Moscow’s support of Yerevan intensified further as the Armenian side
gained the upper hand in the conflict. In the meantime, Turkey and
Iran increased their assistance to Azerbaijan. Turkey closed its
border with Armenia, and Iran created a protection zone within its
borders for tens of thousands of displaced Azerbaijanis. Once Armenia
captured Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding provinces, Yerevan came
under increasing pressure from Turkey and Iran. Russia helped negotiate
the cease-fire in 1994, but by then Armenia had decisively won the war.

Since then, the conflict has shifted to the diplomatic realm, with the
Organization for Security and Co-operation’s Minsk Group providing the
official framework for political negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh
between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The United States became involved
in the negotiations, and the best chance for a settlement emerged
in the early post-Soviet period, when Russia was still weak and
ties between Moscow and Washington were relatively warm. Indeed,
Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosian endorsed the Organization for
Security and Co-operation talks, which advocated a phased approach
to the settlement, including staged land swaps for political and
economic concessions, in 1997. However, this was an unpopular move
within Armenia and eventually led to Ter-Petrosian’s resignation
in an illustration of the degree of political polarization over
Nagorno-Karabakh. Since then, attitudes within Armenia and Azerbaijan
have only grown stronger. Armenia’s last two presidents hailed from
Nagorno-Karabakh and participated in the war.

For the next 12 years, negotiations continued over Nagorno-Karabakh,
but very little progress was made. Sporadic attacks continued on the
line of contact between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the two sides could
not agree on even basic conditions for fruitful talks. However, the
regional climate changed in 2009, whenTurkey attempted to normalize
ties with Armenia in exchange for an agreement between Yerevan and
Baku over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. But because Turkey did not seek
to establish an agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan before talks
on opening the Turkish-Armenian border began, Turkey’s move strained
ties between Ankara and Baku. This benefited Russia, whose position
improved as a result of the increased tensions between Azerbaijan and
Turkey and because Armenia strengthened its ties with Moscow once the
Turkish rapprochement failed. Meanwhile, Iran saw tensions rise with
Azerbaijan due to Baku’s growing relationship with Israel. Iran has
maintained a working relationship with Armenia, though Tehran has
been relegated to a background role in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue
because its primary interests are in the Middle Eastern theater.

Despite Moscow’s leading role in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks,
it has long been in Russia’s interest to maintain the status quo
of hostilities between the two countries. Since the war concluded,
Russia has been in a strategic alignment with Armenia, including
the presence of 5,000 Russian troops in Armenian territory. Russia
also has a military presence in neighboring Georgia in the breakaway
territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The one country in the
Caucasus that has remained outside Russia’s orbit has been Azerbaijan,
which has been able to use its sizable energy resources and diplomatic
maneuvering within the region to create a balance-of-power strategy.

But Russia’s support of Armenia, including its de facto support of
Yerevan’s position on Nagorno-Karabakh, has kept Azerbaijan in check.

Despite Azerbaijan’s claims of being able to forcibly retake
Nagorno-Karabakh and Baku’s security buildup in this regard, Azerbaijan
does not have the capability to confront Russia militarily over
the territory.

The Future of the Dispute

This is not to say that the current state of the dispute
over Nagorno-Karabakh will last forever. As history has shown,
Nagorno-Karabakh has tended to flare up at times of major upheaval
in the wider region, particularly during periods of Russian weakness.

This aspect is worth considering, especially as Russia is again
experiencing major challenges in the former Soviet periphery, as can be
seen in the crisis in Ukraine. Though Russia is on the defensive when
it comes to Ukraine, this by no means marks an impending collapse
of the Russian Federation. Moscow retains significant economic,
political and energy leverage over Ukraine — and the same can be
said for other former Soviet countries being contested by the West,
including Moldova and Georgia. Russia also still boasts a network
of loyal allies within the former Soviet space, including Belarus,
Kazakhstan and Armenia.

However, Russia does face serious long-term challenges to retaining its
powerful position in the former Soviet Union, particularly compared
to its period of re-emergence as a regional power over the past few
years. One country that could pose a particularly substantial challenge
for Russia is Azerbaijan, which has positioned itself as a significant
alternative energy provider to Europe via the strategic Southern
Corridor route. Azerbaijan has also expanded political and security
ties with the likes of Turkey, Israel and (still in a nascent form) the
United States, increasing Baku’s leverage in its dealings with Russia.

It is in this context that Russia has become more engaged on the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue than it has in years, with Russian officials
holding numerous meetings with officials from Azerbaijan and
Armenia on the issue in recent months, indicating a possible shift
in Moscow’s position. But in order for Moscow to truly change its
stance on Nagorno-Karabakh, Russia would need to weaken considerably,
or Azerbaijan would need to become so vital to Russian interests that
Moscow would change allegiances and confront Armenia, an unlikely
prospect at this point.

However, the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh does not solely depend
on Russia. Turkey’s role is also important, especially as Ankara
continues to court Baku into an informal alliance while continuing
efforts to normalize ties with Armenia in a bid to boost its standing
in the region. Turkey is not in as strong a position as Russia,
but the United States’ backing of Ankara’s efforts could reshape
regional dynamics. The extent to which Turkey’s relationship with
Azerbaijan grows, and to which both countries are supported by the
United States, could change the way Nagorno-Karabakh is addressed,
at least on a political level.

In a similar vein, the ongoing nuclear and broader political
negotiations between the United States and Iran could give Tehran a
freer and stronger hand to engage in the region. Iran has been the
least influential of the regional players in the Nagorno-Karabakh
dispute over the past few years, but this could change if the current
adversarial relationship between Tehran and Washington improves.

Certainly with the changes occurring in the Middle East, this is not
out of the realm of possibility.

SPONSORSHIP NEEDED FOR LILIT SHAKHKYAN AT MARI IZMIRLYAN ORPHANAGE

Mari Izmirlyan Orphanage is a state orphanage in Yerevan housing
approximately 100 children with special needs between the ages of
6 and 18. The Sponsorship Program is the primary mechanism through
which SOAR provides support to specific orphaned Armenian children.

Each week we highlight an orphaned Armenian child. This week, we
highlight Lilit Shakhkyan at Mari Izmirlyan Orphanage.

Name: Lilit Shakhkyan

Orphanage: Mari Izmirlyan Orphanage

Gender: Female

DOB: March 6, 2004

Father’s Name/Occupation: Aram Shakhkyan/Unknown

Mother’s Name/Occupation: Shushanik Kavalyan/Unknown

Siblings: None

Family History: Unknown

Health:

Lilit has a serious hearing disability. In 2011, SOAR contributed
to the costs of ear surgery for Lilit in which a Baha device was
implanted in her ear. Lilit currently attends a special school for
the hearing impaired.

Special interests, talents, hobbies, and future aspirations:

Lilit likes to be in the focus of attention. She likes to participate
in individual trainings, to play with constructive games, play
with dolls, and play with bright-colored toys. She does not like to
communicate with peers. She can compare objects and find similarities
and differences. Mostly she communicates with facial expressions
and behavior. Her future aspirations are to develop social skills,
to use voice for communication, and to pronounce sounds.

If you would like to sponsor Lilit, please contact George S.

Yacoubian, Jr., [email protected] or enroll through the
Sponsorship Program by selecting Lilit from Mari Izmirlyan.

Thank you in advance for your support!

The Society for Orphaned Armenian Relief (SOAR) is a 501(c)(3)
nonprofit organization dedicated to providing humanitarian relief to
orphaned Armenian children and adults. Working with a loyal donor
base and a trusted network of partners, SOAR distributes clothing,
educational supplies, medicine, and other essential resources to
orphaned Armenians throughout the world.

SOCIETY FOR ORPHANED ARMENIAN RELIEF (SOAR)

1060 First Avenue, Suite 400, King of Prussia, PA 19406

Office: 610.213.3452 Fax: 610.229.5168

Email: [email protected] Web:

NO ARMENIAN CITIZENS REPORTED AMONG MOSCOW SUBWAY ACCIDENT – ARMENIAN EMBASSY

July 15, 2014 | 11:03

MOSCOW. – As of 11am Armenia time, no information has yet been received
on any Armenian citizens, or Armenians, who might have been affected
by the Moscow subway accident on Tuesday.

There are no data, as of yet, on any affected citizens, Armenian
Embassy in Russia Press Secretary Eduard Jambazyan told Armenian
News-NEWS.am.

Three subway cars have derailed in Moscow Subway. As a result, and
according to preliminary data, three people were killed and seventy
others were injured.

At present, the subway passengers are being evacuated.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

RELIGIOUS CLEANSING – BUT WHO CARES?

NewsMaker, Australia
July 14 2014

Monday, July 14th, 2014 – Australian Christians

Media Statement from Australian Christians:

Songs of peace and love fill western churches as smoke rises from
the rubble of eastern churches falling to jihadist ideologues. Iraq
is experiencing an emptying out of its Christian communities that
date back to the first centuries including Chaldean, Assyrian and
Armenian churches.But who cares?

Secular media seem unable or unwilling to grasp the religious cleansing
we are witnessing. Rather than lament and advocate for those Eastern
Christians and other minorities being religiously cleansed, there
appears to be a devotion to avoiding vilification of Muslim minorities
and in so doing, the plight of those being religiously cleansed from
their homelands is often overlooked.

While tongues are being silenced in western communities, Louis
Sako appointed in 2013 as the new Patriarch of Baghdad, broke with
the Church’s long-standing convention that speaking out about the
problems would only make them worse. He admonished his congregation
with these words: “I know your fears,” … But you have been here
for 2,000 years and are at the origin of this country, together with
the Muslims. Why is the little flock still afraid? Do not emigrate,
whatever the pressures.” Continuing, Sako said to The Sunday Telegraph:

“Christianity in the Middle East has always encouraged its people
to rely on the protection of the law, not the tribe,” “Right now,
the law here in Iraq is very weak.”

And it seems apparent, that tribalism is gaining strength.

Inadvertently perhaps we are supporting tribalism?

Iraqi Christians are crying for help to strengthen Iraqi law and order
in their beloved homeland. Opening up western borders to a flood of
Iraqi refugees as ‘the only solution’ is at odds with the pleas of
many Christian leaders across the Arab world urging them not to leave.

But to stay they will need our help, not our abandonment.

Sako said, unlike their Sunni, Shi’ite and Kurdish neighbors,
Christians have no militias to protect them.

An Erbil-based civil engineer put it this way: “When everything got
violent, the Shiites received help from Iran, the Sunnis had the Gulf,
and us? Well, we were left unprotected”. Aziz Emmanuel al-Zebari,
a Chaldean Catholic church official said: “In opening its doors
(to refugees), the U.S. is weakening those who are left behind.

Strengthening and supporting Iraqi Christians and all who support
the law over tribalism should be the goal. Abandoning villages to be
ransacked by ISIS as the Iraqi military recently did should not be
the standard of those who support religious and civil liberty.

The writing is on the wall. Prior to 2003 the Christian population
of Mosul numbered 130,000. Until early June 2014, there were 10,000.

After the ISIL took over the city last month, only 2,000 Christians
remain.That’s religious cleansing. As the Barnabas Fund reports:
‘atrocities by Islamic militants have been forcing Christians to flee
their homes in Iraq for many years. Christians have been targeted
with kidnappings and brutal killings to make it clear they are not
welcome.’They have also been subjected to financial oppression with
the reintroduction of the jizya – a tax on non-Muslims for living as
second class citizens in the Islamic state.

Iraq was once home to 135,000 Jews. Today less than ten Jews remain
in the entire country. Lest we forget.

Australian Christians seek to loose the tongue of the silent majority
to support the persecuted minorities wherever they may be. There
needs to be a shift from concern about Islamophobia to addressing the
real fears resulting in the religious cleansing of Iraq’s indigenous
population.

THE TRAIN GOING FROM YEREVAN TO MOSCOW GETS STUCK IN SUKHUMI

Caucasus Times
July 10 2014

by Inal Abaza

Prague, 10 July, Caucasus Times. The discussion of the restoration
of transit via the railway line across [Georgia’s breakaway] Abkhazia
is gaining momentum. On 9 July, the issue was discussed by the Abkhaz
parliament. Vice speaker of the Abkhaz parliament, Vagarshak Kosyan,
and a group of deputies to the legislative body (Galust Trapizonyan,
Valeriy Mayromyan and Karapet Karagozyan) came forward with a proposal
to begin extensive public discussions regarding the possibility of
restoring the railway communication via Abkhazia.

Ethnic Armenian members of Abkhaz parliament raise railway issue

The statement, which they issued, said: “On the territory of South
Caucasus, processes of Eurasian integration continue to develop,
gathering speed. In May, Armenia declared its readiness to join the
Customs Union in the shortest possible time. We are sure that this
step is going to be beneficial for all member states of the Customs
Union. We whole-heartedly welcome Armenia’s decision, as consolidation
of the ‘South Caucasus vector’ of Eurasian integration is going to
increase Abkhazia’s chances for joining these integration structures
as a sovereign state. We believe that even now, Abkhazia can facilitate
processes of economic integration in the Caucasus and South Caucasus by
becoming an active participant in the processes. For this purpose, we
call to go back to discussing the issue of opening the Abkhaz-Georgian
section of the former Transcaucasus railway line. This section, which
is the shortest and cheapest, would allow Armenian export goods to
reach Russia by means of the optimal road. For its part, Russia would
get a stable transport corridor to the countiers of the Caucasus,
the Near East and the Middle East,” the statement further said.

The terminology, which the vice speaker of the Abkhaz parliament took
the liberty to use, was extremely interesting: “The Abkhaz-Georgian
section of the former Transcaucasus railway line”. First, the thing is
that the speaker not only failed to be politically correct, but he also
forgot that Armenia, whose interests he is lobbying, does not recognize
the independence of Abkhazia. Second, Georgia, via which the “road
of life” runs, will not even discuss the project in the Abkhaz format.

Abkhaz political forces “hold together” on railway issue

The railway project, which became topical in view of the early [24
August presidential] election in Abkhazia, sparked an ambiguous
reaction among political parties and movements of Abkhazia. In
particular, the Coordination Council of Political Parties and Public
Organizations of Abkhazia issued a special statement. Notwithstanding
the fact that the essence of the statement was embodied in the
terminology used by Vagarshak Kosyan, particularly, the fact of the
Georgian-Abkhaz section of the railway line being used, it was clear
that all political forces of Apsny (Abkhazia) hold together regarding
the given issue: If you need the railway, do recognize the independence
of Abkhazia and allocate funds.

However, due to the fact that Russia is the main lobbyist of the
project, political forces of the republic of Abkhazia refrain from
harsh pronouncements.

The statement by the Coordination Council of Political Parties and
Public Organizations of Abkhazia says: “As a result of the aggressive
policy pursued by Georgia, railway communication via Abkhazia has
been blocked for more than 20 years. On several occasions, Russian
and Abkhaz sides raised the issue of the restoration of transit
via the Abkhaz railway line. However, it remains unresolved up to
now. It is obvious that Georgia and its Western allies purposefully
hinder de-isolation of the [railway] communication of the South
Caucasus region and Armenia. The restoration of the transit railway
communication along our section of the former Transcaucasus railway
line will undoubtedly help to solve many economic and strategic
problems, which are posed to Russia and Abkhazia. Therefore, we support
Russia’s consistent efforts regarding the restoration of the railway
communication, considering that Abkhazia should participate in the
talks on the problem as a full-fledged side. In addition to this, we
would like to direct the attention of Abkhaz public figures and MPs of
the Abkhaz parliament to the fact that there is no Abkhaz-Georgian
line, as mentioned in the statement, as the term implies joint
property. There is an Abkhaz [railway] line, which is the property
of the republic of Abkhazia, which is not under Georgian jurisdiction.

Therefore, we urge all participants in public discussions to be more
careful about the terminology they use”.

The issue of the railway line operability is always accompanied with
scandals. It is first and foremost due to the fact that multi-billion
investments needed for the Abkhaz section of the railway line carry
risks for Abkhazia: It will be either too heavy a credit or a long-term
lease, which does not ensure profit for the republican budget. Even
today, Abkhazia owes the Russian Railways for restoring the railway
communication linking Abkhazia to the south of Russia.

Being in Moscow in June 2013, former Abkhaz prime minister Sergey
Shamba said that “Abkhazia is interested in the restoration of
Moscow-Sukhumi-Tbilisi railway communication and sooner or later,
it will accept the project”.

Railway of “strategic importance” for Russia, “threat” for Baku

Today, the size of investments to be made in the construction of
the Abkhaz-Georgian railway section amounts to 300m dollars. The
reconstruction of the Moscow-Sukhumi route cost the Russian Federation
about the same. About 70 per cent of the amount of workload in the
sphere was carried out due to specialists from Moscow, as well as
the delivery of equipment from the metropolitan area of Russia.

Economic expert at the Voice of America radio station Vardkes Artsruni
recently said that the “restoration of the Abkhaz-Georgian section
of the former Transcaucasus railway is of strategic importance for
Armenia and Russia. This line would make it possible for Russia to
restore stable communication traffic with the states of the Caucasus”.

This by no means plays into the hands of all Caucasus countries. Baku
was the main opponent of the “road of life” connecting Armenia and
Russia. In Baku, they perceived the “road of life” as a threat posed
to their national security, thinking that echelons of tanks will be
sent from Russia to Armenia.

[Translated from Russian]

“SILENCE” INTERRUPTED KIM KI-DUK’S SILENCE IN CINEMATOGRAPHY: KOREAN FILM DIRECTOR VISITS ARMENIA

18:01 14.07.2014

Alisa Gevorgyan
Public Radio of Armenia

He didn’t go to school, because only 50% of children in South Korea
attended school, when he was a child. He used to repair cars until
the age of 30, and watched the first film when he was 32. The
film “Silence” changed his life and interrupted his silence in
cinematography.

The best known South Korean film director of all times Kim Ki-duk is
in Yerevan at the invitation of the Golden Apricot 11th International
Film Festival. Retrospective screening of his films will take place
within the framework of the festival. During the Sunday opening
ceremony Kim Ki-duk was granted the Parajanov Thaler Award.

Kim began his career as a screenwriter and won the first prize in a
scenario contest held by Korean Film Council in 1995. In the following
year, Kim made his debut as a director with a low budget movie titled
Crocodile (1996).

In 2004, he received Best Director awards at two different film
festivals, for two different films. At the Berlin International Film
Festival, he was awarded for Samaritan Girl (2004), and at the Venice
Film Festival he won for 3-Iron (also 2004). In 2011, his documentary
film Arirang received an award for best film in the Un Certain Regard
category from the Cannes Film Festival.

In 2012, his film Pieta received the Golden Lion award at the Venice
Film Festival, the first Korean film to receive a “best film” honor
at one of the top three international film festivals – Venice, Berlin
and Cannes.

The director is visiting Armenia for the first time. He searched the
web to learn about Armenia before the visit, and spent three hours
this morning walking in the streets of Yerevan.

Kim Ki-duk recognizes no rules and laws in art. the only thing
he trusts is his feeling of fiction and style. He experiences new
emotions in Armenia. He’s surprised and grateful that his films are
known in a country he has just discovered.

The South Korean film director promised today to present his new film
in Yerevan and performed a Koran folk song to conclude the meeting
with Armenian art lovers.

CIVIL INITIATIVE “NO TO ROBBERY” CALLS ON ARMENIAN CITIZENS TO TAKE AN ACTIVE PART IN SIGNATURES COLLECTION AGAINST GROWTH OF ELECTRIC POWER TARIFFS

by Alexandr Avanesov

Monday, July 14, 16:30

Civil initiative “No to robbery” has called on Armenian citizens
to take an active part in signatures collection against growth of
electric power tariffs.

Activists of the movement have issued a statement saying that the
research held by Public Services Regulatory Commission (PSRC) on the
expenditure predictions submitted by the energy system companies
and their obligations for 2014-2015, the discussion of the energy
tariffs, as a result of which a decision was adopted to raise tariffs,
as well as the explanation, why they need adopting such a decision,
are suspect. The citizens which have signed under the requirements,
demanded to fix reasonable tariffs.

The statement of the civil initiative consists of 8 points:

1. To set up a commission to investigate profit and expenditure of
the energy companies, including the formation of the deficit in an
amount 17,9 billion AMD.

2. To involve specialists of the civil initiative “No to robbery”
and members of the Armenian parliament in the commission as its
fully-fledged members.

3. To provide the needed level of transparency of the work of the
commission.

4. To give such authorities to the Commission which would let it
implement the above-mentioned functions.

5. Not to raise electric power tariffs until ending of the work of
the commission.

6. After ending of the work of the Commission, to discuss in the PSRC
a problem of decrease of the electric power tariff.

7. To revise the regulating sector of legal norms.

8. To create conditions for using of alternative energy sources,
offering tax privileges to the companies generating them, which will
result in dropping of the electric power tariffs.

LIFE IN KESSAB SLIGHTLY IMPROVES, BUT THERE IS STILL LONG WAY TO PASS

[ Part 2.2: “Attached Text” ]

18:44, 15 July, 2014

YEREVAN, JULY 15, ARMENPRESS. Life in Kessab is gradually improving,
the infrastructures work better, but there is still quite a long
way to pass. The Kessab-Armenian Karo Manchikian stated this in a
conversation with Armenpress. He added that the aids provided to
Kessab are by sequence distributed among the residents. According
to Karo Manchikian, already two subsidies were distributed among
the Kessab residents, besides, the Syrian Red Crescent organization
delivers various types of products to the residents. “Water
cisterns were bought by the provided money, which had been stolen,
they also bought a pump to drug the plants.

The residents will use it passing to each other,” Manchikian
noted.

He added that the Syrian authorities provided tractors envisaged for
drugging the plants until winter.

Karo Manchikian also informed that in the near future the Kessab
residents will be provided with other aids.

ere-is-still-long-way-to-pass.html