Author: Kanayan Tamar

LES INVESTISSEMENTS DANS LE SECTEUR AGRICOLE AU KARABAGH SONT PROMETTEURS SELON TIGRAN SARKISSIAN

KARABAGH

Le Premier ministre armenien Tigran Sarkissian a declare que les
investissements dans l’economie du Karabagh, en particulier dans
l’agriculture, sont prometteurs.

Le bureau de presse du gouvernement d’Armenie rapporte que les membres
de la delegation dirigee par le premier ministre a visite un certain
nombre d’entreprises dans la Republique du Haut-Karabagh.

Tigran Sarkissian a souligne l’importance des programmes agricoles,
la production d’huile vegetale, par exemple, ce qui a son tour favorise
en outre des investissements dans le domaine.

Les domaines de la planification urbaine et du tourisme sont d’une
importance particulière a declare le premier ministre.

mercredi 11 septembre 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

PARKING A EREVAN : LES FONCTIONNAIRES DECLARENT QUE LES PLAINTES NE SONT PAS FONDEES

ARMENIE

Le directeur de Parking City Service qui offre des services de
stationnement prives pour la municipalite d’Erevan, a dit que les
plaintes en cours contre les règles de stationnement recemment imposees
ne sont pas fondees.

” Les conducteurs utilisant des parkings prives vont payer trois
fois moins qu’avant, donc je ne vois pas comment cette vague de
mecontentement peut etre fondees. Que quoi sont-ils mecontents ?

Qu’ils paient moins maintenant ? ” a declare le directeur de ”
Parking City Service ” Vazgen Harutyunyan a dit a ArmeniaNow.

Il a declare a la presse lundi que la societe a fait l’equivalent de
3 millions de dollars d’investissement pour atteindre 5 millions de
dollars d’ici la fin de l’annee et 5 autres millions de dollars sont
prevus pour etre investis l’an prochain.

L’entreprise a installe des cameras de surveillance de haute qualite
et d’autres equipements requis qui fonctionnent sans intervention
humaine. Le parking pour plus de cinq minutes et jusqu’a une heure
coûte 100 drams (25 cents), 24 heures coûte 500 drams (1,21 $),
une semaine de parking coûte 1000 drams (5,90 $), un parking pour
un mois coûte 2000 drams (environ 11$) et un an coûte 12000 drams
(environ 30 $). Le parking de minuit a 9 heures est gratuit.

Vazguen Harutyunyan dit que six rues du centre, a savoir les rues
Mashtots, Moscovyan, Sayat-Nova, Toumanian, Khorenatsi et Amiryan,
sont entièrement equipes tandis que les autres rues qui n’ont pas de
tels equipements ne sont pas encore sous surveillance complète.

Les habitants d’Erevan ont regarde avec hostilite la mise en place
de parcs de stationnement prives (depuis le 1er Août). President de
l’ONG ” Achilles ” la protection des droits des conducteurs Eduard
Hovhannisyan qui se felicite personnellement de l’innovation, affirme
que les clients qui se tournent vers lui avec des plaintes croient
souvent que les autorites ” ont mis au point un truc de plus pour
collecter de l’argent “.

En ce qui concerne les plaintes que les paiements de stationnement
sont fabriques par SMS sans obtenir un recu de paiement, Vazguen
Harutyunyan a dit que les abonnes de Vivacell peuvent obtenir leurs
recus dans les centres de services de leur operateur de telephonie,
tandis que les abonnes de Beeline et d’Orange dans les centres de
services de paiement en ligne Edram.

Par Siranuysh Gevorgyan

ArmeniaNow

mercredi 11 septembre 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

EREVAN PRET A UN RAPPROCHEMENT AVEC L’UE

Europe

Le ministre des Affaires Etrangères Edouard Nalbandian a declare
que l’Armenie est prete a poursuivre son rapprochement avec l’Union
europeenne, tant que cela ne contrevient pas a son adhesion a l’union
douanière dirigee par la Russie.

Il reste toutefois difficile de savoir si le gouvernement armenien
espère encore sauver une petite partie de son accord d’association
avec l’UE, celle où il n’est pas question du libre echange et de
l’harmonisation des politiques economiques.

Interroge par le service armenien pour savoir si une version beaucoup
plus courte de l’accord peut encore etre signe lors du sommet de l’UE
en novembre, Nalbandian a declare : ” Nous avons ete clairs a ce
sujet. Après ma rencontre avec le ministre des Affaires etrangères
de la Lituanie et le commissaire europeen a l’elargissement Stefan
Fule, nous avons rendu public le fait que l’Armenie desire avoir une
cooperation etroite et profonde avec l’UE, dans tous les formats et
les moyens n’entrant pas en contradiction avec l’adhesion de l’Armenie
a l’union douanière.”

Après s’etre adresse au Parlement, Nalbandian a brièvement parle
aux journalistes sur les raisons de la decision inattendue du
gouvernement. Le ministre a repondu aux questions en prive pendant
plus d’une heure.

La plupart des deputes de l’opposition n’ont pas ete satisfaits de
ses explications. “Edward Nalbandian n’a repondu a aucune question,
nous n’avons pas eu de reponses sur les questions de fond” a declare
Nikol Pashinian.

” La reunion a ete videe de toute substance “, a convenu un autre
depute de l’opposition, Alexandre Arzoumanian.

Nalbandian a rejete ces plaintes. ” J’ai donne des reponses a toutes
les questions qui m’ont ete posees ” a t-il dit aux journalistes.

Nalbandian n’a cependant pas repondu a la question d’un journaliste
concernant la cause de cet abandon de dernière minute, après des annees
passes a negocier la creation d’une zone de libre-echange approfondi
et complet avec l’UE. L’UE a averti a plusieurs reprises que l’ALE
approfondi et complet “n’est pas compatible ” avec l’adhesion a
l’union dirigee par la Russie.

mercredi 11 septembre 2013, Claire ©armenews.com

GENOCIDE: CONVERSATION STOPPER AND THE EVENTS OF 1915

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Sept 10 2013

by Matt Haydon*
10 September 2013 /

There is a “war of words” going on within the Armenian academic
community in the pages of Armenian Weekly about those who participated
in a recent conference titled “The Caucasus at Imperial Twilight:
Nationalism, Ethnicity and Nation-Building, 1870s-1920s” (Tbilisi,
Georgia, June 5-9).

A group of professors are accusing the Armenian scholars who
participated in the conference to discuss the Caucasus and the events
of 1915 either as denialists or being co-opted.

As a member of the Armenian community and a participant in the Tbilisi
conference, I was disturbed to learn that I was also labeled a genocide
denier. While I am an Armenian whose family also escaped the horrors
of what happened in the Ottoman Empire, I am also a student who is
interested in finding out how the events of 1915 took place, what
exactly happened and why it happened. This is the point of attending an
academic conference: to explore new ideas and concepts and to interact
with scholars who are working on the issues. More importantly, it is
to identify areas in research that are lacking and need exploration.

What was the purpose of the Tbilisi Conference? Was the goal of the
conference to push the agenda of genocide denial? Absolutely not.

First of all, the conference, as apparent in its title, covered the
imperial rivalries in the 19th and early 20th centuries and tried to
understand local competition of different nationalisms along with the
end of the Ottoman Empire as well as the root causes of World War I.

At no point in the literature about the conference or during the
interaction with the organizers of the conference was there any
indication that the conference would center on the events of 1915 in
Anatolia and the topic of genocide denial.

Why do we need to accuse those who disagree with the Armenian version
as a genocide denier? What is the purpose of doing it? The participants
of the conference were from all over the world, including the United
States, Canada, Turkey, Russia and Georgia. Only one scholar was
from Armenia, Ara Papian. There were a few Armenian scholars from
the United States who have been subsequently labeled denialists.

All of the other Armenian scholars from Armenia withdrew at the last
minute due to external pressures, i.e., the government of Armenia. It
is not the job of a government to instruct scholars what to study and
how to study the subject matter. The Republic of Armenia should not
constrain academic debate and not penalize those who do not subscribe
to the official Armenian historiography. This goes against the core
of academic freedom.

At no point during the conference did the scholars deny that there
was suffering in Anatolia in 1915 or before. This is an important
fact the Turkish government has acknowledged; there was suffering of
the people, especially Armenian. However, the Turkish government will
not describe the event as genocide due to a number of reasons. When
I asked a Turkish scholar about why Turkey refused to recognize it
as genocide, he said:

“There are three reasons: We still do not know exactly what happened.

The key source for our understanding is the Russian archives and
they have just become accessible to scholars. Second, ‘genocizing’
the events of 1915 started after 1965 and as a way of perpetrating
the image of the terrible Turk, recycling Islamophobic discourses
and turning American public opinion against a NATO ally during the
Cold War; third, given what took place in Karabakh in terms of ethnic
cleansing and [the] deliberate killing of people because they were
Turks shows the capacity of what revolutionary Armenian committees were
capable of doing. Finally, there is a powerful memory in Anatolia and
[it] identifies the Armenian revolutionary groups as villains. No
Turkish government could ignore this powerful memory.”

Thus, the Turkish government recognizes the sufferings of both the
Armenian population as well as the Muslims.

The major question some of the participants had of the events of 1915
was not whether 1915 was a genocide or not, but rather what, why and
how it happened? Some participants did, in fact, label the events
of 1915 as genocide, but there was not a reaction to the label. In
other words, people were more focused on what happened rather than
the label. Can genocide laws be applied to events that happened before
the laws were enacted? Why is it so important that the events of 1915
be called genocide? There are major problems in genocide studies.

The genocide discipline has created an environment of political
correctness that handicaps scholars and prevents them from in-depth
examination of controversial issues. The topic of genocide stirs many
emotions for those who want to be recognized as victims and those
who reject the label. The concept of victimhood has become a constant
through genocide studies. Unfortunately, Armenians have reified this
concept by “othering the Turks” as an enemy.

There is no other concept that has gripped this many Armenians:
The past is nothing but genocide and without its recognition, the
Armenians somehow lose historical and cultural significance. This
concept goes further with the notion that the Turks are guilty and
the Armenians are victims. It has become “the Church” for Armenians
both in Armenia and outside the country.

There are two issues: Do we, the Armenians, insist on a concept,
which stops any form of conversation, and also become a partner to
the perpetration of the image of the “Terrible Turk”? Second, do we
know exactly what took place in 1915? What is necessary are more
multi-disciplinary studies that represent different disciplines,
geographies and national historiographies, which was the very
purpose of the conference. Moreover, the scholars who have different
perspectives need to come together and discuss and help us to better
understand what took place without dehumanizing each other.

Archives in Russia and Turkey as well as the formerly closed
Ottoman archives are now open. The archives are important avenues to
“reconstruct the past” from those fragments and find answers, but both
sides of the argument must engage and speak to each other rather than
organizing conferences just among the believers. Armenians must not
simply follow the paradigm that the events of 1915 were genocide and
there is no other way of understanding what took place. What must be
realized by all scholars is that there are shades of gray in every
event and they should prepare to listen to the alternate narratives.

Once someone is labeled as a genocide denier, conversation and
exploration stop. Is this what we, the Armenians, want? To end the
conversation and mobilize the anti-Turkish groups, whether they are in
the United States or Anatolia, to push our version down the Turkish
throat? These tactics have not worked and will not work; instead,
they will make the Turks more resistant. Turkey is a regional power
with 80 million people and one of the fastest growing economies,
and we cannot impose our version of the past on Turkey.

The collective memory in Anatolia is diametrically different than
what we are told in the diaspora. We can only socialize and overcome
the excesses through debate and engagement to build a shared language.

What is the end goal of labeling a person a genocide denier? Will this
label cause Turkey or perhaps the United States government to change
their stance? The answer is no. Insisting on genocide will not build
any bridges with Turkey. We need to find another way of discussing
what took place. The last, well-funded campaign of the Azerbaijani
government to get the Karabakh killings to be recognized as genocide
shows that this weapon could easily be turned against Armenia as well

*Matt Haydon is a Ph.D. student at the University of Utah.

DIYARBAKıR CHURCH TO DISPLAY ARMENIAN LEGACY

Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Sept 10 2013

DÄ°YARBAKIR – Anadolu Agency

One of Diyarbakır’s most famous churches, the Armenian church of
Surp Giragos, is set to become a city museum hosting artwork and
artifacts depicting the Armenian history in the city.

Earlier, the Hurriyet Daily News reported that Diyarbakır Metropolitan
Mayor Osman Baydemir and Surp Giragos Armenian Foundation President
Ergun Ayık had signed a protocol to turn the church, which was
recently restored and opened to prayer, into a museum.

According to the protocol, the church’s Hıdır Ä°lyas section will
be given to the municipality and converted into a museum featuring
belongings and ethnographic artifacts.

Ayık said the church was the largest church in the Middle East but was
in ruins until it was restored and reopened to worship three years ago.

Noting that the church was surrounded by many famous buildings and
artifacts in the city, Ayık said, “The representatives are evaluating
the buildings around the church.”

The Diyarbakır City Museum will display Armenian heritage and
Armenian art. “We are currently meeting with the municipality and we
have signed a protocol to open this part,” Ayık said.

“We will first collect artifacts before decorating the museum. The
decorations and the curation will be made according to the artifacts,”
said Ayık, noting that there would be information about the family,
social and cultural life of Armenians.

Letters from Lice

Very few artifacts have survived over the past 100 years, but Ayık
said they were able to collect letters from 1913 from a family who
lived in the province’s Lice district, as well as kitchen appliances,
musical instruments and other examples of writings from elsewhere.

During the last 100 years, many artifacts that belonged to Armenian
families have been lost, he said. “We are currently collecting
artifacts to display in the museum. This is the first time that
something like this has happened in Turkey, and many people are
approaching this with suspicion.”

The written documents are very valuable because they reflect the
lifestyle of Armenians at the time, he said. “We have collected
these documents from Turkey and also from foreign countries. We have
succeeded in collecting these artifacts.”

Noting that there were also many financial documents, Ayık said
these revealed the debts and the trade that Armenians had in history.

Artifacts in Istanbul

The artifacts that have been collected have been sent to Istanbul to
be analyzed and researched.

Collecting the data and the artifacts has taken a long time, he said,
adding that the job was an important task that only professionals
could do.

After analyzing the works, the artifact will be sent to the museum
for display.

Surp Giragos, which boasts seven altars, originally had an earthen
roof, although a new roof of wood was subsequently erected over the
restored church. It was closed in 1915-1916 before being returned to
the local Armenian community in 1960.

A new bell that was made for the reopened church was made in Russia
especially for the place of worship.

September/10/2013

SPECULATION OVER THE REOPENING OF RAILWAYS IN ABKHAZIA

The Messenger, Georgia
Sept 10 2013

By Messenger Staff
Tuesday, September 10

On September 6, Secretary of Armenia’s National Security Council,
Artur Baghdasaryan, in his interview with Novosti Armenia (News
Armenia), stated that Russia, Georgia and Abkhazia have agreed to
reopen the Abkhazian section of the railway connecting Georgia with
Russia. “This is a process and we should understand that both sides
of the conflict exist, but there exists the political goodwill to
open this segment of the railway,” stated Baghdasaryan.

According to him, this issue is strategically important for Armenia’s
economy and it was discussed during the meeting between the presidents
of Armenia and Russia on September 3 in Moscow.

The issue is really crucial for Armenia. It has been discussed many
times on different levels. However, it has been Georgia that has
refrained from providing the push on this issue by putting forth
certain preliminary conditions.

Armenia and Russia are strategic partners. Moscow is the guarantor
of Armenia’s safety and security. It has taken commitment to protect
Armenia in the case of any military confrontation, but these two
countries do not have a common border and thus – land connections. The
only possibility for ensuring such connection is via Georgia. There
is only one road – the Georgian military road, which runs through the
Larsi checkpoint and enables Russian and Armenian cargo circulation.

There is also the possibility to transport goods between Armenia and
Russia via the Georgian Black Sea port of Poti. However, both these
ways are complicated; they take much time and extra expenses. So,
of course Armenia is interested in having a railway connection with
Russia so that the goods could be transported by the railways between
the two countries on a regular basis.

As soon as Baghdasaryan had aired his statement, the Georgian
political establishment, analysts and the media began discussing this
issue. Tbilisi denied Baghdasaryan’s allegations stating that the
Georgian government had expressed interest towards this issue and even
today it is ready to discuss the initiative. However, it does not mean
that any decision has been made yet, the government’s statement reads.

In fact, no official decisions have been made whatsoever, the Georgian
government has stated.

The Georgian Prime Minister’s Special Envoy for Relations with Russia,
Zurab Abashidze, who conducts bilateral negotiations with the Russian
Deputy Foreign Minister, Grigory Karasin, said “We are not discussing
the issue of opening the railways passing through Abkhazia with the
Russian side.”

Abashidze said this topic has not been discussed with Mr. Karasin at
all. “But if there is an initiative from the Russian side, we are ready
to listen. However, if the railway is restored it would be on the basis
of protecting Georgia’s territorial integrity,” Abashidze explained.

Commenting on the issue, Ivanishvili said that it is not only a
simple economic question. The first factor that hinders reopening
of the railway is Russia’s recognition of the independence of the
separatist regimes.

Georgia’s former leadership form the United National Movement (UNM)
thinks that this is not in the interest of Georgia to reopen the
railway because the opening of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway is
underway and carries strategic importance for the country.

Some analysts express their concern over the issue connecting
Baghdasaryan’s statement with Armenia’s decision to join the Eurasian
Union and its customs treaty. The analysts suspect that Yerevan will
probably join this agreement and in return Moscow promises to regulate
the railway issue with Georgia.

Unfortunately, Georgia knows very well how Russia can regulate
relations with its neighbors.

OBAMA CALLS FOR DIRECT AZERBAIJAN-ARMENIA DIALOGUE ON N KARABAKH

ITAR-TASS, Russia
September 9, 2013 Monday 11:05 PM GMT+4

BAKU September 9

– U.S. President Barack Obama said it was the time for new efforts
to restore peace in the area of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the
basis of the compromise reached during the talks.

In his message to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev delivered by
James Warlick, the new U.S. Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, who
is in Baku on an exploratory trip, Obama had offered full support
to Warlick in his mission and said his appointment to this post a
month ago was a strong sign of the U.S. commitment to act towards a
peaceful settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh.

The U.S. president supported Aliyev’s intention to use direct
dialogue with Armenia in the coming months, with the assistance of
the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, to break the stalemate in the
Nagorno-Karabakh talks.

Aliyev said earlier that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict could be
resolved only if the territorial integrity of his country was ensured.

“The conflict can be resolved only within the framework of the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. There is no other solution,
and I have no doubts that Azerbaijan will restore its territorial
integrity,” the head of state said.

He stressed that Azerbaijan was seeking to solve the issue
“peacefully.”

“We hope for a peaceful resolution yet. To this end, the Armenian side
should unconditionally comply with the resolutions of international
organisations, including the U.N. Security Council, free the occupied
territories, and Azerbaijani citizens should return to their homes.

After that peace and stability will come to the region,” Aliyev said.

He said the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was the “biggest source of
threat” in the region.

Azerbaijan and its people “will never allow a second Armenian state
to be created on their historical land,” he said.

“Nagorno-Karabakh will never get independence. The people who live
in Nagorno-Karabakh now, and the Azeris will certainly return there
should live in autonomy. This is a well known international approach,”
the president said.

He made it clear that Azerbaijan would “never step aside from its
position of principle.”

The head of state called for a speedy and fair settlement in Karabakh
on the basis of international law.

Speaking of the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh, he said it was
“a matter of the future.”

“We have said many times that we will never agree to any status for
Nagorno-Karabakh outside Azerbaijan, and international law supports
our positions,” the president said.

Aliyev urged Armenia to continue peace talks on Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began on February 22, 1988. On November
29, 1989 direct rule in Nagorno-Karabakh was ended and Azerbaijan
regained control of the region. However later a joint session of the
Armenian parliament and the top legislative body of Nagorno-Karabakh
proclaimed the unification of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia.

On December 10, 1991, Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh held a referendum,
boycotted by local Azeris, that approved the creation of an independent
state.

The struggle over Nagorno-Karabakh escalated after both Armenia and
Azerbaijan obtained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. By
the end of 1993, the conflict had caused thousands of casualties and
created hundreds of thousands of refugees on both sides. An unofficial
ceasefire was reached on May 12, 1994.

As of August, 2008, the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group were
attempting to negotiate a full settlement of the conflict. On August 2,
2008, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan travelled to Moscow for talks with Dmitry Medvedev, who was
Russian president at that time. As a result, the three presidents
signed an agreement that calls for talks on a political settlement
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

RUSSIAN-ARMENIAN CONSULTATION ON DEFENSE

Politics – Tuesday, 10 September 2013, 10:20

On September 9 a Russian-Armenian consultation on military political
issues was held at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia. The
head of the Armenian department of arms control and internationals
security Samvel Mkrtichyan and the head of the Russian department of
security and disarmament affairs M. Ulyanov’s delegation had a thorough
discussion of negotiations on conventional arms, the agreement on
trade in arms, anti-missile defense, the global initiative against
nuclear terrorism, as well as a wide range of issues relating to the
nuclear summit 2014 in the Hague. The current situation and possible
development in Syria were touched upon. During the negotiations further
deepening of Armenian-Russian partnership and cooperation within the
CSTO were highlighted. The importance of regular consultations between
the two ministries was highlighted, and agreement was reached to hold
the next consultation in Moscow in December 2013, the MFA informed.

SOSE & ALLEN’S LEGACY FOUNDATION AND ATP TO PLANT MEMORIAL FOREST IN ARMENIA

Tuesday, September 10th, 2013

Sose & Allen’s Memorial Forest Campaign

Kick off social media campaign to advance the late couple’s legacy.

GLENDALE-Sose & Allen’s Legacy Foundation and Armenia Tree Project
have announced the establishment of a memorial forest in Armenia
in honor of Sose Thomassian and Allen Yekikian. The young couple,
who had strong ties in Armenia as well as throughout the diaspora,
lost their lives as a result of a car accident four months ago.

Vache Thomassian, Sose’s brother, and several close friends launched
the Legacy Foundation to support the couple’s core values: education,
repatriation, volunteerism, and democratic development. “The Forest
will serve as a living, breathing memorial to Sose and Allen, and
will have a positive effect on Armenia’s environment,” said Vache.

Here’s how the campaign will work. For every new “Like” on ATP’s
Facebook page, five trees will be planted in the memorial forest.

“This is a collaborative and interactive campaign, highlighting the
great work Armenia Tree Project does, and we’re asking the public to
spread the word to grow the forest. The social media aspect emphasizes
Sose and Allen’s focus on utilizing technology and encouraging direct
participation,” continued Vache.

Sose & Allen

The campaign was launched on September 10th, Sose’s birthday and will
conclude on Allen’s birthday on March 10, 2014. The organizations
hope that the effort will attract at least 10,000 “Likes” in order
to plant 50,000 trees, covering 45 acres, and raise awareness of
ATP’s mission in Armenia. Site selection will begin immediately,
and planting will commence in the spring of 2014.

Tax-deductible contributions to support the memorial forest may be made
to Armenia Tree Project by calling (617) 926-TREE, via ATP’s website
, or by mail payable to Armenia Tree Project,
65 Main Street, Watertown, MA 02472. Donors are asked to indicate
that the gifts are “In memory of Sose and Allen” online or on the
memo line of their checks.

Armenia Tree Project was established in 1994 to plant trees in urban
and rural sites throughout Armenia, provide environmental education
to Armenia’s schoolchildren, provide jobs in seasonal tree-related
programs, and help improve the environment and standard of living
in Armenia.

Sose & Allen’s Legacy Foundation works to continue their vision
by establishing programs and supporting existing programs aimed at
bridging the gap between Armenia and its Diaspora, through an emphasis
on education, repatriation, and volunteerism.

THOUSANDS FLOCK TO “ARMENIA DAY” CELEBRATION IN BUENOS AIRES

11:34, September 10, 2013

Armenian community organizations and their members took part in
September 8 festivities celebrating “Armenia Day” in Buenos Aires.

The festivities, attracting more than one thousand visitors, who
viewed photos of scenic sites in Armenia and Artsakh, tasted Armenian
traditional cuisine and saw displays of handmade souvenirs.

Local Armenian song and dance groups performed for the throngs of
visitors.

All the fun took place in the Anoush Auditorium of the Armenian Center.