Author: Kanayan Tamar

No US, Russian Peacekeepers in Karabakh: Opinions from Baku and Yerevan

05.08.2014 19:38 epress.am

Interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh does not mean that it will become
an independent entity, Azerbaijani political analyst Zardusht Alizadeh
(pictured, below) in conversation with Haqqin.az, commenting on OSCE
Minsk Group US Co-ChairJames Warlick’s speech yesterday on the
official policy of the US Government on settlement of the Karabakh
conflict.

According to Alizadeh, the US, Russia, and the EU will be closely
monitoring the formation of Karabakh: how it complies with
international laws, adheres to democratic standards and human rights,
ensures the cohabitation of Azerbaijani and Armenian communities, and
so on. “Only then will these countries decide whether this formation
can survive independently or not,” he said.

“Maybe Karabakh will never be endowed with separate status. All these
issues have been developed over a long time, and there is nothing new.
We, in fact, lose nothing. We return all the occupied territories, and
our people [to] Shushi and the other cities of Karabakh, where they
lived before the conflict,” he added.

Regarding the deployment of peacekeepers in Karabakh, the analyst said
neither Russian nor American peacekeepers benefits Azerbaijan. “I
think, the main difficult negotiations will be on this issue,” he
said.

Armenian public figure Ara Nedolyan (pictured, above) believes that
the six principles proposed by American diplomacy are still “raw” and
don’t provide a clear prospect for conflict resolution and the
establishment of peace. On his Facebook page, Nedolyan wrote
[AM]:”First, Armenia and Azerbaijan agree on the final status of
Nagorno-Karabakh. Question: how to agree when their positions are
diametrically opposed? Azerbaijan insists that Nagorno-Karabakh must
remain within Azerbaijan, which is unacceptable for us.

“The remaining points in the face of this contradiction are
meaningless but also have internal contradictions: in particular, if
the Lachin and Kelbajar regions do not remain under the control of the
Armenian side, the point about ensuring a land corridor between the
Republic of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh becomes meaningless.

“Also meaningless is the point about the return of displaced persons.
Because of the reasons I mentioned, Azerbaijanis cannot return to
Lachin and Kelbajar, cannot return also to Shushi (it has already been
resettled) or Khojaly, which simply doesn’t exist. And where should
the Armenian residents of Shahumyan and Getashen return, if they are
not to be included in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh?

“Also meaningless is the point about introducing peacekeeping troops
because if the parties overcome the aforementioned contradictions and
clearly take the path to reconciliation, then peacekeeping forces are
simply not needed; they have no problem to resolve. And the
introduction of foreign troops on the territory of independent states
is itself a destabilizing fact.

“My conclusion: unrealistic principles, which cannot serve as a basis
for reconciliation, no matter how much [Armenian President] Serzh
[Sargsyan] has not secretly given his approval. It absolutely doesn’t
oblige us to anything.”

According to Azerbaijani political analyst Vafa Guluzade (pictured,
above), Baku must agree on the principles articulated by Warlick,
since “no one will no longer offer us anything.” “All these issues are
reflected in the Madrid Principles, and there is nothing new. If they
didn’t prevent it at the time, [former President of Armenia] Levon
Ter-Petrossian had agreed to this option. If the US is principled on
this matter, perhaps something will work out with them.”

At the same, Guluzade is against deploying Russian and American
peacekeepers. “After the events in Ukraine, believing in Russian
peacekeepers is the same as not having respect for yourself, and the
Americans didn’t behave themselves in Kosovo. I think, in this matter
we have to defend our own interests,” he said.

Armenia’s industrial output drops by 2.8 percent to 274.3 billion drams

YEREVAN, May 8. / ARKA /. Armenia’s industrial production in January-
March 2014 amounted to 274.3 billion drams, a 2.8 percent decline when
compared with the same period in 2013, according to the National
Statistical Service (NSS).

NSS said the manufacturing sector accounted for 59.3% of the total
output. Its share decreased by 4.1% from the year before to 162.9
billion drams.

The mining sector decreased by 1.1% to 44.5 billion drams. Supplies of
electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning dropped by 0.5 percent to
62.6 billion drams. Water supply and water treatment and recycling
output grew by 6 percent to more than 4.2 billion drams. ($ 1 –
413.29 drams). -0-

– See more at:

Arif Yunusov: One should be pragmatist but not theorist when settling conflicts

Yunusov’s interview with ArmInfo correspondent was ready to
publication when the information about detaining Yunusov and his wife
Leyla Yunus made us delay it, so that not to give another reason to
the official Baku `to prove’ its accusation in the so called
`cooperation’ with Armenia. Now, when the situation has been more or
less clarified, the editor’s office has decided to publish the
interview.

by David Stepanyan

Thursday, May 8, 13:36

The name of the known human rights defender, conflictologist,
analyst, the head of the Department of Conflictology and Migration
Studies at the Baku-based Institute of Peace and Democracy, Arif
Yunusov, has been circulating in mass media of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Among other our Baku counterparts, Yunusov is accused in espionage
activity in favor of Armenian intelligence services, allegedly, as a
result of his participation in the international conferences organized
in Armenia. Yunusov’s interview with ArmInfo correspondent was ready
to publication when the information about detaining Yunusov and his
wife Leyla Yunus made us delay it, so that not to give another reason
to the official Baku `to prove’ its accusation in the so called
`cooperation’ with Armenia. Now, when the situation has been more or
less clarified, the editor’s office has decided to publish the
interview.

Certain circles in Armenia and Russia point at the Crimea like a
precedent for Nagornyy Karabakh. What is the most possible motivation
of that?

By pointing at Crimea as a precedent for Karabakh, Moscow tries to
exert pressure on Yerevan. This is just a message to Yerevan. In
other words, it is just an element of a political game, which does not
at all demonstrate that Russians are concerned over the fate of
Karabakh people. The question is who is making such statements.
Officials are responsible for their statements, especially given that
their words may be misinterpreted by another party. For instance, some
proposals have repeatedly been made in Armenia to recognize the
independence of Karabakh and unite it with Armenia. It is noteworthy
that the ruling party keeps making efforts to prevent it. It is clear
that they do that not because they like or dislike the people of
Karabakh, but because they realize that such steps will immediately
affect the peace process and that Baku’s response will create a new
situation that will change the whole format of the peace process.

I think that freer experts and journalists can afford more but the
people bearing direct responsibility for the peace process cannot. In
Azerbaijan the opposition experts’ statements on Crimea are much freer
than the careful response of the authorities who realize that the
relations with Moscow may inevitably become tense. This is why
whenever I hear that a particular conflict is a precedent for another
conflict, I know that it first of all demonstrates that the conflict
will not be resolved soon. To search for precedents means to lack the
aspiration to resolve the conflict by the direct efforts of the
conflicting parties, I believe that the parties to any conflict
resolve the conflict by themselves if they want. If they have no
desire to resolve it, they look for “elder brothers” and precedents.
Besides the Crimea, both Kosovo and Eritrea could have been precedents
for Karabakh. History has a plenty of examples. When resolving
conflicts, one should be a pragmatist rather than a theorist .

Armenia supported the right of the people of the Crimea for
self-determination. Is such a stance of our leadership stemming only
from the interest of the expected recognition of Nagornyy Karabakh?

Intrinsically, none of the states, including the USA, which speaks
of democracy so much, displays an approach meeting some international
principles. The right to self-determination is a two-edged sword.
Azerbaijan considers itself a victim of separatism and raises this
issue in Iran, where Azeris live in the northern provinces. Turkey
does the same in Cyprus. Europeans speak so much of democratic values
but we perfectly see that they give high priority to the energy
values. Europe blames Russia for using gas as a tool of blackmail and
at the same time turns a blind eye to the similar actions of
Azerbaijan. In the relations with Azerbaijan, Europe puts the
democratic principles aside. In this light, I perceive such talks as
diplomatic rhetoric. As regards pragmatism, it is restricted to
Realpolitik which is far from all these principles.

This is big geopolitical game, in which strong pressure is being
exerted on Armenia and other countries. So, Russia badly needs its
actions in Ukraine to be supported not only by its strategic allies,
especially given Lukashenko’s silence and the fact that initially
Nazarbayev was totally against recognition of Crimea. Therefore, now
Russia gives high priority to the response of Armenia, which kept
silence in 2008. As for the West, it needs an absolutely different
response from Yerevan. I think that the steps of small Armenia, which
is swimming between the waves of pressure, should meet its own
national interests. One should understand that the unresolved
Karabakh problem dictates deliberation. A statement in Yerevan will
inevitably be followed by a response in Baku. And it is still a big
question who will benefit from the following developments.

Ankara links its refusal to open the border to Armenia with
Azerbaijan’s pressure. Is it really so?

Certainly, Azerbaijan uses all its possibilities to exert pressure on
Ankara in order to prevent it from unblocking the Turkish-Armenian
border. Nevertheless, if we take a pragmatic view of this issue, it
becomes clear that small Azerbaijan is unable to dictate Turkey’s
foreign political agenda. And of Turkey decides to open
Turkish-Armenian border, it will not even take Azerbaijan’s stance
into account. So, if Turkey takes such a decision tomorrow, it will
not even take into account Azerbaijan’s stance. Neither does Turkey
give much importance to the Armenian Cause, which is so important to
Armenia. Most Turks do not even know what happened in 1915. Turkey
gives high priority to the relations with the West, with the European
Union. Turks are imperial people and in this context they can be
compared with Russians. Armenians, Azeris, Georgians are small
nations, which are constantly looking for “elder brothers’.

In the meantime, Russians and Turks have an absolutely different
psychology. In fact, Russians do not care for Georgia or Armenia.
Russians demand respect from the United States and Europe. The same
can be said about Turks, who are eager to join the European Union.
But when they throw sand in the wheels of Turks and demand normalizing
relations with Armenia, Turks understand that after normalizing
relations with Armenia they will be forced to improve relations with
Kurds and so on and so forth. Therefore, Turkey perceives the Armenian
Cause as an element of big geopolitics in relations with Europe, which
does not want to admit Turkey to its Christian club – European Union.
So, if Turkey understands that it really has the prospects to join the
EU, it will immediately open the Turkish-Armenian border even without
taking into account the stance of Azerbaijan.

What is the key motivation of the USA demanding from Turkey to unblock
the border to Armenia?

The USA remembers about the shut down border from time to time
especially before the elections, taking into consideration the role,
authority and the votes of the Armenian Diaspora. But in general, not
so much Armenians as Russia is important for the USA. That is to say,
everything is again returning to the course of the big geo-political
game, the part of which is confrontation between the USA and Russia
for controlling the South Caucasus, the Azerbaijani political expert.

The improvement of relations between Turkey and Armenia will cast
doubt upon Russia’s influence in Armenia and the necessity of its
military base deployment in Armenia. That is to say. much will
change. This is the reason, why I have never believed that Moscow is
really striving to settle the Karabakh conflict. If the conflict is
settled suddenly and normal relations are established between Armenia
and Azerbaijan, the problems between Armenia and Turkey will be
automatically removed. In that case a question will arise – who will
the Russian base protect Armenia from? Iran?

Meanwhile, though it is paradoxical. but today the pro-Western moods
are stronger in Armenia than in Azerbaijan. Who knows, what will
happen tomorrow after settlement of the Karabakh conflict. I think
that the Karabakh conflict is like a punching ball for Russia, which
the latter uses from time to time for imposing pressure either upon
Armenia or Azerbaijan. From time to time, Russia promises to help
either Baku or Yerevan to settle the Karabakh conflict, according to
the principle “if you behave well”. Actually, they will never help
either Azerbaijan or Armenia. Karabakh should hang thick in the air
and Armenia and Azerbaijan remain tied to Karabakh. Just for this
reason, Americans are so much hurry to settle the Karabakh conflict
and to open the border between Armenia and Turkey. This will make it
possible to withdraw Russia from the region. Not the American altruism
is the reason of that, but the struggle for the influence in the
region.

The Iranian counterparts have been traditionally blaming the USA and
Israel for the tense relationas between Iran and Azerbaijan. What is
your point of view on thematter?

When my Iranian counterparts traditionally blame the USA and Israel
for the tense Iran-Azerbaijan relations, I want to ask them. Why does
Iran hinder restoration and enhancing of the Azerbaijan-Israel
relations? We have Israel’s Embassy in Baku, but despite availability
of a big Azerbaijani community in Israel, we do not have Azerbaijan’s
Embassy in Tel-Aviv. The reason of it is that Iran is absolutely
against normalization of relations between our countries. For this
reason, Iran is the third party in the relations between Azerbaijan
and Israel. Meanwhile, the Azerbaijani society remembers very well
Iran’s stance in the Karabakh conflict and thinks it is not impartial,
although Iran does not think so. Certainly, there is misunderstanding,
weak contacts and the role of the third countries in the relations
between Baku and Teheran. The point is, in what assembly to revise all
this. I think that undoubtedly the problem of Islam is the main
thunder for Azerbaijan from the Iranian party as well as the policy of
Iran regarding the national minorities of Azerbaijan: the Talish and
Tat nations. So, if in its relations with Azerbaijan Russia uses the
problem of the Lezgins and naturally the Karabakh conflict, just the
same way, Iran uses the national minorities in its own interests. The
“Seher-2” TV channel is an anti-Azerbaijani one, which broadcasts
anti-Azerbaijani propaganda in Azerbaijani language every day.
Naturally, the small Azerbaijan does not like it, as it has its own
phobias regarding Iran. Incidentally, for its part, Iran scares an
independent Azerbaijan which promotes separatist moods in its northern
provinces.

LA JUSTICE TURQUE INCULPE 13 MILITAIRES QUI AVAIENT INTERCEPTE UN CONVOI VERS LA SYRIE

Turquie-Syrie

AFP РLa justice turque a inculp̩ 13 militaires qui avaient
intercepté en janvier des camions des services secrets turcs en
route pour la Syrie, réclamant pour chacun d’eux la prison a vie,
rapportent jeudi les médias turcs.

Les 13 hommes seront prochainement jugés a Adana (sud) où
se sont produits les faits, a une date encore indéterminée, et
l’acte d’accusation qui les vise requiert la prison a perpétuité,
précise l’agence de presse Dogan. Les suspects sont notamment accusés
d’avoir “divulgué des informations d’Etat a des fins politiques ou
d’espionnage”, selon l’agence.

Des équipes de la gendarmerie, corps d’armée en Turquie, avaient
arrêté et fouillé a Adana, ville proche de la frontière syrienne,
sept camions sur la foi d’un renseignement recu selon lequel ils
transportaient des armes et des munitions. Les autorités avaient
affirmé que le personnel a bord était constitué de membres de
l’agence nationale des renseignements (MIT), en mission officielle.

Les camions sont repartis après leur fouille et le gouvernement,
très irrité, a annoncé qu’ils transportaient de l’aide a la
minorité turkmène du nord de la Syrie et démenti toute livraison
d’armes. Les militaires qui avaient intercepté les camions ont par
la suite été relevés de leurs fonctions.

L’incident intervenait en plein scandale de corruption qui a entaché
le gouvernement islamo-conservateur du Premier ministre Recep Tayyip
Erdogan après des révélations faites a la mi-décembre et pour
lesquelles le chef du gouvernement a accusé la confrérie du
prédicateur Fethullah Gulen d’avoir fabriqué les preuves.

M. Erdogan a procédé a une vaste purge depuis dans la magistrature
et la police, instrumentalisées, selon lui, par le mouvement Gulen
pour le renverser. Le pouvoir a en outre fait adopter au Parlement en
mars une loi controversée qui confère des pouvoirs accrus au MIT. La
nouvelle législation accorde notamment une impunité judiciaire pour
les membres du MIT dans l’exercice de leurs fonctions.

Le gouvernement d’Ankara est un farouche opposant au régime du
président syrien Bachar el-Assad et héberge l’opposition en exil,
mais a démenti a plusieurs reprises avoir fourni des armes aux
insurgés.

Cependant en décembre, les médias turcs, citant des documents de
l’ONU et du gouvernement, ont affirmé que le pays avait envoyé 47
tonnes d’armes aux rebelles depuis juin 2013.

jeudi 8 mai 2014, Jean Eckian ©armenews.com

LE CONCERT DE CHARLES AZNAVOUR A EREVAN LE 12 MAI AFFICHE DEJA COMPLET

AZNAVOUR

Le concert de Charles Aznavour a Erévan le 12 mai affiche déja
complet. Tous les billets de ce concert qui se déroulera au centre
” Hamalir ” Karen Démirdjian d’Erévan sont vendus. Des billets
dont les prix variaient entre 10 000 et 60 000 drams (environ
120 euros). Ces derniers avaient déja été intégralement vendus
trois jours après leur mise en vente. La salle 2200 places sera donc
archicomble pour ce concert unique d’Aznavour en Arménie a l’occasion
de la visite du président Francais Francois Hollande.

Krikor Amirzayan

jeudi 8 mai 2014, Krikor Amirzayan ©armenews.com

GRAVES DOMMAGES APRES LA TEMPETE DE NEIGE DE FIN MARS

AGRICULTURE

Le ministère de l’Agriculture a évalué mercredi les graves
conséquences pour des milliers de producteurs de fruits et de légumes
de la tempête de neige sans précédent qui s’était abbatue dans
le sud de l’Arménie a la fin mars.

Garnik Petrosian,Vice- ministre de l’Agriculture a estimé a plus
de 11 milliards de drams (26 millions de dollars) les dommages
consécutifs a ce cataclysme. On se souvient que cette forte chute de
neige accompagnée de températures glaciales avait bloqué fin mars
certaines routes arméniennes et forcé le gouvernement a annuler
les cours dans les écoles et les universités. Mais, plus important
encore, elle avait ravagé dans le sud et a l’ouest la vallée d’Ararat
de nombreux arbres fruitiers qui étaient une source de revenus pour
les agriculteurs locaux.

Citant une évaluation détaillée réalisée par son ministère,
Petrossian a déclaré que la catastrophe a endommagé plus de 9000
hectares de terres agricoles cultivées par des habitants de quelque
290 villages.

Petrossian a estimé qu’en conséquence, la production d’abricot
d’Arménie totalisera seulement 8.000 tonnes cette année, soit une
baisse colossale par rapport aux 90 000 tonnes déclarées en 2013. Les
dommages a d’autres cultures comme les pêches, les raisins et les
pommes sont moins graves, a t-il déclaré lors d’une conférence
de presse.

Petrossian a dévoilé une série de mesures gouvernementales visant a
aider les 3700 ménages ruraux durement touchés par cette tempête de
neige. Elles seront exemptées de l’impôt foncier et bénéficieront
d’une réduction de 50 pour cent sur les frais d’irrigation. La Banque
centrale d’Arménie est également en négociation avec les banques
commerciales pour geler le remboursement des prêts accordés a ces
agriculteurs.

De son côté, le Premier ministre Hovik Abrahamian a promis l’aide
du gouvernement aux agriculteurs a l’occasion d’une visite dans
certaines des zones touchées la semaine dernière. Mais ni lui,
ni le ministère de l’Agriculture n’a signalé de plans pour fournir
des compensations financières.

Les villageois arméniens, qui tirent pour la plupart leur subsistance
de l’agriculture, perdent régulièrement une grande partie de
leur chiffre d’affaires prévisionnel en raison de la grêle, des
gelées, des sécheresses et autres conditions météorologiques
défavorables. Petrossian a déclaré qu’une assurance agricole
obligatoire est la seule solution réaliste a ce problème. Mais il
n’a donné aucune indication sur un projet gouvernemental de ce type.

jeudi 8 mai 2014, Ara ©armenews.com

DINING PROFILE: VASKEN’S DELI

Springfield News-Leader
May 7 2014

Ed Peaco, for the News-Leader

Building on 17 years of success in Branson, Vasken and Staci
Haroutounian recently opened another Vasken’s Deli in Battlefield
Marketplace, specializing in Mediterranean fare and providing hearty
flavors with great variety and value.

The food includes Vasken Haroutounian’s dishes based on his
Lebanese-Armenian heritage, as well as Greek entrees and salads and
standard sandwiches, most of which are priced to compete with typical
lunch menus across town. Vasken Haroutounian said his restaurant
stands apart with his focus on flavor.

“Once people come and eat our food — that’s all it takes, just one
time — they will say, ‘My goodness, where have we been all this time?’
” The Haroutounians, who have 27 years of experience in the restaurant
business, said the food is made from scratch using healthy ingredients
and cooking methods.

Vasken Haroutounian brought out dishes that mostly emphasized the
Lebanese aspect of the menu. For example, the deli offers a Greek gyro,
but he suggested the Lebanese version, known as shawerma.

Shawerma ($6.99): Seasoned beef brisket (or chicken) served on pita
bread with tahini, green leaf lettuce, tomatoes, onions and pickles.

Touches of cinnamon and cloves in the brisket seasonings created a
levitating effect of flavor and aroma. The pasta salad that came with
the sandwich was seasoned with garlic, parsley, Italian seasonings
and basil, as well as a touch of Aleppo pepper with medium heat,
from Syria.

Combo platter ($9.99): Hummus, babaganoush, stuffed grape leaves and
falafel, with tahini, tzatziki, feta, olives, tomatoes and toasted
pita. Listed on the menu as an appetizer, this plentiful platter could
be a pass-around starter or an entree for someone with a big appetite.

It was a great way to sample a range of tastes. It included:

* Falafel: Robustly seasoned with onion, parsley, garlic and cumin.

With tahini for dipping.

* Grape leaves: Mildly seasoned with parsley and onion, with creamy
rice inside, accompanied by tzaziki, a sauce of cucumber and yogurt.

* Hummus: Smooth and creamy, with a garlic presence that was less than
ferocious. Easing off the garlic was intentional, Vasken Haroutounian
said. “For a lot of Americans, I have to be careful. They do like
garlic, but not like the Middle Easterners.”

* Babaganoush: Boldly smoky. Vasken said he achieves this result by
burning the skin of the eggplant to a black ash and blending a little
of it into the mix.

* Feta: This domestic Greek cheese from cows’ milk made a mellower
feta.

* Kalamata olives: These full-flavored olives were imported from
Greece.

Greek salad (small $4.99, large $6.99): This salad had all the Greek
elements that cry out for individual attention: cucumber, bell pepper,
red onion and peppercini. Feta cheese and Kalamata olives provided
body. The olive oil dressing came with seasonings settled at the
bottom of the sauce cup. Be sure to stir or shake so you won’t miss
out on those flavors.

Coffee ($1.99): Vasken brought out his coffee service and made Armenian
coffee from a powdered dark roast. While cardamom imparted an exotic
effect, the great strength of the coffee brought me firmly back to
earth. Sugar softened the overall effect. “You can’t beat this coffee,
my friend,” Vasken said.

Desserts: The baklava ($1.99) was more flaky than syrupy, and the
cashew fingers (99 cents) were light and not too sweet. These desserts
go great with the strong coffee.

Vasken’s Deli Where: 900 E. Battlefield Road Hours: 11 a.m.-8
p.m. Monday-Saturday; closed Sunday Call: 417-888-0083 Web:
vaskensdeli.com Email: [email protected]

ACADEMICS TO COMPILE HISTORY OF TURKS AND ARMENIANS

World Bulletin, Turkey
May 6 2014

A 35-volume compilation of Turkish-Armenian history composed by 350
historians is to be published.

World Bulletin / News Desk

The history of Turkish-Armenian relations, beginning from the start
of the Middle Ages to the present, is to be summarized in a 35-volume
compilation by the Turkish History Institution in cooperation with
a range of academic historians.

The compilation will be entitled “Turks and Armenians in History”
and will be composed of articles by 350 academics, Professor Mehmet
Metin Hulagu, president of the Turkish History Institution, told
Anadolu Agency on Tuesday.

He said there were many questions, especially regarding the incidents
of 1915, to which the compilation would give answers.

Hulagu said the compilation will be completed by April 2015 in order
to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the relocation of Turkish
Armenians during World War I.

Condolences offered

At that time, when a portion of the Armenian population living in
the Ottoman Empire sided with invading Russians and rose up against
the Ottoman authority, Ottoman-era officials decided to relocate the
Armenians living in eastern Anatolia.

The Armenian diaspora and the state of Armenia have described the
incidents as “genocide” and asked for compensation, while Turkey says
that even though Armenians died during the relocation, many Turks
were also killed in attacks carried out by Armenian gangs.

Last month, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan offered his
condolences for the deaths of Armenians during the incidents of 1915.

LES DIRIGEANTS IRANIENS LOUENT LES RELATIONS HISTORIQUES AVEC L’ARMENIE

DIPLOMATIE

Les principaux dirigeants politiques de l’Iran font l’éloge des
relations chaleureuses de leur pays avec l’Arménie voisine et et
appellent a leur expansion a déclaré lundi le ministre arménien
des Affaires étrangères Edouard Nalbandian en visite dans ce pays.

Edouard Nalbandian a rencontré a Téhéran le président iranien
Hassan Rouhani, le président du parlement, Ali Larijani, et le
ministre des Affaires étrangères, Mohammad Javad Zarif pour
des entretiens axés sur les liens économiques bilatéraux et
la sécurité régionale. Ils ont également discuté des crises
persistantes en Ukraine et en Syrie.

“Le président Rouhani a décrit les relations Téhéran – Erevan
d’historiques et de culturelles et a souligné que les deux pays ont
un bon potentiel pour l’expansion de leur coopération ”, a rapporté
l’agence officielle de presse IRNA.

” Nos relations avec l’Arménie sont anciennes et très cordiales ”,
a estimé Mohamad Zarif lors d’une conférence de presse conjointe
avec son homologue arménien. ” Nos pays ont une relation basée
sur le respect mutuel, leurs intérêts nationaux et prennent des
positions similaires sur la scène internationale. ”

“Nous avons discuté des relations politiques , parlementaires,
culturelles et économiques et les moyens possibles d’élargir les
liens dans le domaine des transports, de l’énergie et du secteur
bancaire ”, a déclaré le chef de la diplomatie iranienne. Il a
souligné l’importance de ces liens avec Téhéran. Selon IRNA , les
deux ministres des Affaires étrangères ont discuté des moyens de ”
réactiver ” la commission intergouvernementale arméno- iranienne
sur la coopération bilatérale qui supervise la mise en Ŕuvre
de projets énergétiques communs. Des officiels avaient déclaré
plus tôt cette année que la commission se réunirait a Téhéran
en mai. Nalbandian et Zarif n’ont pas précisé si la réunion va se
dérouler comme prévu.

La commission devait discuter de la construction reportée a plusieurs
reprises d’une centrale hydroélectrique majeure sur la rivière Arax
qui marque la frontière arméno- iranienne. L’ambassadeur d’Iran en
l’Arménie, Mohammad Reisi, a imputé ce retard aux graves restrictions
imposées par Erevan aux opérations de trésorerie entre les banques
arméniennes et iraniennes en raison des sanctions internationales
contre la République islamique. Reisi déclaré le 17 Mars que
l’assouplissement en cours de ces sanctions est de bon augure pour
le lancement cette année de ce projet de 350 millions de dollars.

Parlant au service arménien de RFE / RL ( Azatutyun.am ) deux jours
plus tard, Armen Movsisian alors ministre arménien de l’Ã~Inergie
avait indiqué que les deux gouvernements allaient bientôt commencer
a négocier sur la possibilité d’augmenter considérablement les
livraisons de gaz naturel iranien en Arménie.

Selon le ministère arménien des Affaires étrangères , Zarif
et Nalbandian ont discuté ” des mesures a prendre pour la mise
en Ŕuvre de divers projets communs. ” Ceux-ci incluent non
seulement la centrale hydroélectrique, mais aussi la construction
en cours d’une troisième ligne de transmission reliant les réseaux
électriques arméniens et iraniens ainsi que des plans ambitieux pour
la construction d’un chemin de fer Arménie – Iran. Le communiqué
du ministère ne précise pas si les ministres sont parvenus a des
accords concrets sur ce sujet.

Les deux ministres ont également parlé du conflit du Haut –
Karabakh , et Nalbandian aurait de nouveau remercié Téhéran pour
sa position ” équilibrée ” sur le conflit. Zarif , pour sa part ,
” a réitéré la gratitude de l’Iran pour le soutien de l’Arménie
a la République islamique d’Iran dans la politique internationale ”,
a rapporté l’agence de presse Mehr. ” Nous avons également discuté
des développements en Ukraine et en Syrie ”, a ajouté M. Zarif.

Ã~Itaient également a l’ordre du jour les négociations en cours
entre Téhéran et l’Occident visant a résoudre le différend de
longue date sur son programme nucléaire controversé. Nalbandian,
cité par son service de presse, a estimé ” bienvenu ” l’accord
provisoire qui a été atteint par l’Iran et six puissances mondiales
en novembre dernier. Il a exprimé l’espoir qu’ils travailleront a
un ” règlement global ” bientôt.

mardi 6 mai 2014, Ara ©armenews.com

WEST UNABLE TO CONCEDE RUSSIA’S POINT ON UKRAINE

The Japan Times
May 5 2014

by Gregory Clark

It’s hard to understand the rationale for the Western, and Japanese,
sanctions against Russia over Ukraine. Moscow says it wants a federal
system of government giving more power to semi-autonomous regional
units. And many in the West say they would support something similar.

Even Kiev sees it as one acceptable outcome of the constitutional
referendum it plans for May 25. So why the sanctions and all the
heavy breathing?

The best answer we can get from Washington is that while it supports
decentralization, it opposes too much power being given to the regions
since this will favor Moscow in the traditionally pro-Russia east of
the nation. So the Western objection is simply over the hypothetical
degree of an autonomy to be decided in the future? And for that reason,
we have troops being rushed into Poland, Cold War warriors are being
unleashed, and sanctions imposed?

True, there are also objections to Moscow running military exercises
along the east Ukraine border. But that is something the U.S. does
along the North Korean border every year. The only other possible
objection is over Crimea. But while many were unhappy about its
separation into Russia, is anyone asking for that to be reversed?

The real complaint, it seems, is the claim that Moscow is behind the
takeovers of east Ukraine government offices and towns by pro-Russian
elements, and could plan a Crimea-like takeover of the area. But
this too is hypothetical, and the evidence provided so far has been
highly dodgy, including the usual doctored photos dragged out for
these occasions. It is also highly illogical.

The last thing Moscow needs is a division of Ukraine into east and
west. It would leave a backward minority in the east dependent on
Russia for economic recovery, and a strongly anti-Russian majority
in the west determined to point a pro-EU, pro-NATO dagger directly
into Russia’s underbelly.

The ideal for Moscow is an intact Ukraine, but with the pro-Russian
regions able to prevent anti-Moscow moves by Kiev. In other words,
neutralization on the Finland model. Is that really so sinister
and outrageous?

Ironically the origin of the current disputes was something very
un-sinister. It was the naive Soviet illusion that under communism all
peoples would come to love each other. Druzhba narodov — friendship
of the nationalities — was the slogan. So it did not matter if
they were bundled together in the various republics of the former
USSR. Southern Ossetians and Abkhazians were pushed into Georgia even
though they had little cultural, religious or any other connection;
Christian Armenians found themselves inside Muslim Azerbaijan. And
large numbers of Russian-speakers found themselves inside Moldova,
Kazakhstan, the Baltic States and Ukraine.

The hoped-for Communist love-in never happened. One of the better
Radio Armenia jokes doing the rounds when I was working in the former
Soviet Union goes like this:

Dear Announcer, what is druzhba narodov? Comrade, it is when Armenians
join together with the Russians, the Uzbeks, the Azerbaijanis, the
Tajiks, the Kirgizi, the Kazakhs, the Turkmenians, the Estonians,
the Latvians, the Lithuanians, and the Ukrainians, and they all go
off together to beat up the Georgians.

As you can guess, Georgians were not greatly loved by neighboring
Armenia. The only thing keeping them all together was strong central
control from Moscow, and harsh repression of any nationalistic
break-away tendencies

With the arbitrary breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 into its former
republics, frictions were inevitable, and some were ugly. Russians
in the Baltic states suffered severe job discrimination. Armenians
went into a brutal and still continuing war with Azerbaijan over the
Nagorno-Karabakh district inside Azerbaijan but populated by Armenians.

In 1992 Russians stranded in Moldova fought a brief war to create their
own independent self-styled republic (Transnistria, now blockaded by
Ukraine), as did the pro-Russians in Georgia’s Abkhazia.

In 2008 the Georgian attack into South Ossetia led to a counterattack
by Russia, which then recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as
independent states.

Crimea, which had been rather foolishly gifted to Ukraine by Russia
in 1954, despite its Russian majority and strong military importance
to Moscow, has now been returned to its former owner.

Within Ukraine, the situation had long remained fairly stable under
the rule of Kiev; Ukrainians and Russian-speakers share fairly similar
languages, religions and cultures. But as the economy faltered and
the politics disintegrated, lingering historical distrust between
east and west surfaced, with the results we see today. Pro-Russians
blame ultra right-wing, anti-Russian nationalists in the west acting
under Western influence, and to some extent they are right.

Kiev’s short-lived attempt to restrict use of the Russian language
in this bi-lingual society was extremely foolish.

Moscow is also to blame; its repressive politics have repelled many in
the Ukraine, the better-educated especially, who now see closer ties
with the West as the only escape from current problems. A federation
that allows both sides reasonable autonomy under a central government
is clearly the best answer.

As for the Crimea problem, we can learn much from the former
Yugoslavia. Here the communistic ideal of mixing the peoples together
in a bid to overcome deep wartime hatreds has also proved optimistic.

The only answer has been separation of the peoples — in Croatia,
with the expulsion of the Serb minority, and in Bosnia with the
Serbs setting up their own semi-independent republic. As constituent
republics in former Yugoslavia they have been able to go their own
independent way. But in Kosovo, which like Crimea did not have republic
status, independence from Serbia could only be claimed after the Serb
minority was either expelled or forced into a tiny enclave.

Curiously, the West which condemned the bloodless separation of Crimea
from Ukraine, supported the separation of Kosovo from Serbia.

Ask Western officials why the difference and they will say because
the Kosovo separation was done over time. Yes, time for the brutal
bombing of Serbia and for the savage ethnic cleansing of remaining
Serbs, Jews, and Romas. It is time for a lot more clear thinking in
the West over the Ukraine problem.

Japan needs it even more. By its knee-jerk support for the West over
Ukraine, Tokyo not only guarantees Moscow’s refusal to offer any
compromise in the dispute over ownership of the south Kuril Islands
(the so-called Northern Territories). It is also supporting Western
moves that guarantee Russia will move closer to China. Tokyo loses
out in both directions, simply to support Western moves of doubtful
common sense and dubious legality. Strategic thinking was never a
Tokyo forte, but this time it has really blundered.

Gregory Clark is a former Australian diplomat with China and Russia
experience, and a longtime resident of Japan.