Author: Kanayan Tamar

Trend, Azerbaijan
June 7 2013

Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry welcomes European Council’s statement

7 June 2013, 13:32 (GMT+05:00)

Azerbaijan, Baku, June 7 / Trend S. Agayeva /

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan welcomes the statement of
the President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy that the
strengthening of stability in the Caucasus is based on the principles
of territorial integrity and independence, Foreign Ministry spokesman
Elman Abdullayev said at a news briefing.

“This is an indication that the international community respects the
principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty, and opposes the
change of borders by force,” he said.

This shows once again that Azerbaijan’s position coincides with the
position of the international community, Abdullayev noted.

The principles of a comprehensive settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict should be agreed upon now, European Council President Herman
Van Rompuy said in Yekaterinburg on Tuesday.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

Armenian armed forces have occupied Nagorno-Karabakh and seven
surrounding regions of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a
ceasefire agreement in 1994.

The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia, France and the U.S.
are currently holding peace negotiations.

Armenia has not yet implemented the U.N. Security Council’s four
resolutions on the liberation of the occupied territories.

The Times of Malta
June 7 2013

Resilient Malta stun Armenia

Friday, June 7, 2013, 17:18
by Kevin Azzopardi, Yerevan

ARMENIA-0, MALTA-1

Malta produced a resilient performance to defy the odds after beating
Armenia 1-0 for their first win in World Cup qualifying Group B.

Seeking their first point after losing their opening five qualifiers,
Malta were given no chance of denying Armenia who were chasing a win
to kickstart their faltering World Cup campaign but they were in for a
surprise.

Leading through Michael Mifsud’s eight-minute opener, Malta weather
long spells of Armenian pressure, throwing bodies in the way of shots
and crosses to hold on to their advantage.

Mifsud’ is likely to grab the headlines after netting the goal that
gave Malta their first competitive win away from home since the 1-0
win over Estonia in 1993 but all the players contributed to this
famous, hard-earned win, not least goalkeeper Justin Haber who was
imperious in goal.

It was anything but easy as Armenia pressed incessantly after falling
behind but Malta deserved their luck for a battling display that
earned them their first points in this qualifying campaign.

Pietro Ghedin’s team selection featured no surprises as he sent out
the same team that started the 2-0 home defeat to Italy in March.

In defence, Luke Dimech and Jonathan Caruana occupied the two
centre-half roles while Alex Muscat began on the left and Ryan
Camilleri on the right.

Roderick Briffa and Gareth Sciberras were deployed in front of the
four-man rearguard with Edward Herrera and Clayton Failla on the wings
and Andrè Schembri behind captain Michael Mifsud, Malta’s lone striker
in a traditional 4-2-3-1 approach.

Armenia were the brighter side in the early stages but it was Malta
who silenced the home crowd by taking an eighth-minute lead. Malta
broke forward with speed as Schembri passed to Sciberras who released
the speeding Mifsud who was clean through.

Armenia goalkeeper Roman Berezovsky repelled Mifsud’s initial shot but
the Malta captain did not miss with his second attempt, lifting the
ball high into the net for his 37th goal in international football.

Stunned by Mifsud’s opener, Armenia swiftly regained the initiative.
They were denied by Haber on 16 minutes as the Malta goalkeeper pushed
away a close-range header from Lazarian following a corner.

Malta, sporting white outfits, were quick to switch from defence to
attack as Schembri again released Mifsud but this time the Valletta
striker was crowded out by the home defenders.

Another fine Malta move unsettled Armenia’s defence as the influental
Schembri released Herrera on the left. The Birkirkara speedster cut
into the box before playing a cross towards the far post where Mifsud
and Failla were unmarked by the latter headed over.

Armenia were seeing more of the ball but Malta were dangerous every
time they pushed forward on the counter.

At the back, Ghedin’s men refused to wilt, Muscat blocking a dangerous
shot by Manucharyan before Haber pulled off a brilliant save to tip
Pizzelli’s looping drive over the bar.

Danger loomed for Malta when, with six minutes of the first half
remaining, Mkhitaryan sped into the box after a free-kick was
deflected into his path but his diagonal effort was cleared.

Haber did well to fist away Manucharyan’s corner but Armenia persisted
with their attack. Manucharyan jinked his way into the box before
sending in a perfect cross into the six-yard box but Lazarian headed
just over.

As the second half got underway, Armenia poured forward in search of
an equaliser.

Kamo Hovhannisyan made good progress on the right but his dangerous
cross was pawed away by the alert Haber.
The Malta goalkeeper than saved Ozbiliz’s grounder from outside the box.

Ten minutes into the second half, Ghedin had to make his first
substitution after Sciberras suffered what looked like an arm injury
after falling awkwardly. Paul Fenech replaced his Birkirkara
team-mate.

Armenia threatened again when Ozbiliz’s teasing free-kick sailed into
the crowded box and towards goal but Haber showed excellent reflexes
by keeping the ball out.

Caruana then headed away another menacing cross from Movsisyan as
Armenia upped the pressure.

Artur Sarkisov, who scored Armenia’s winner when they beat Malta 1-0
in September, came on for Davit Manoyan. Sarkisov almost emulated his
scoring act as, seconds after entering the field, he ran on to
Pizzelli’s through-ball but his strike hit the base of the near post.

Malta were hanging in. Hovhannisyan accelerated into the box but his
effort was blocked by the excellent Haber who repelled everything
Armenia were throwing at him.

The Birkirkara goalkeeper frustrated Armenia again with another fine
save from Ozbiliz’s drive.

Mkhitaryan was wide with a free-kick and, four minutes from time,
Voskanyan hit wide after Ozbiliz’s corner was deflected into his path.

In stoppage time, Caruana made a timely block to deflect Mkhitaryan’s
shot over the bar.

In a statement shortly after the game, PN spokesman for sports Robert
Cutajar congratulated Malta on the result achieved.
Armenia

R. Berezovsky, V. Aleksanyan, T. Voskanyan, R. Arzumanyan, K.
Hovhannisyan, D. Manoyan (76 A. Sarkisov), K. Lazarian, A. Ozbiliz,
H. Mkhitaryan, M. Pizzelli, E. Manucharyan (46 Y. Movsisyan).
Malta

J. Haber, J, Caruana, G. Sciberras (57 P. Fenech), R. Camilleri, L.
Dimech, C. Failla, R. Briffa (85 R. Muscat), M. Mifsud (90+ T. Vella),
E. Herrera, A. Schembri, A. Muscat.

Referee Arnold Hunter (N. Ireland).

The White House, USA
June 6 2013

Washington: Remarks by the Vice President to the American Turkish Council

Washington

The White House has issued the following news release:

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. (Applause.) You all should
know better than to listen to the Ambassador. Thank you all very, very
much.

Mr. Deputy Prime Minister, it’s great to be with you. Quite frankly,
we’ve become friends, and it’s great to join you tonight and be here
to speak to this organization.

And, Ambassador Holmes, and, President and CEO of the Turkish Council
Tom Kennedy, thank you for the kind words as well.
Look, it’s most of all a pleasure to be back here with Rich Armitage,
Ambassador Armitage. We’ve been good friends — I mean this sincerely
— we’ve been good friends for a long, long time. And the thing that I
like about him — and we went through some pretty interesting times in
eight years in another administration and long before that. And the
thing about Rich Armitage and I’m sure it’s the reason why you look to
him is he is absolutely straight as an arrow. He’s the only witness I
can say who testified before my committees multiple times that I
never, never — and I mean this sincerely — once ever wondered
whether I was being misled or I was being misled by omission — never
one single time. And that is a rare commodity in this town, and almost
any other town. And so I realize, Mr. Ambassador, I’m probably ruining
your reputation by acknowledging this, but I — if I were a little
freer to tell you, I still seek his counsel, and he’s still an
incredible asset to the United States government.

I’m delighted to be here with all the Turks and Americans who through
business, family, friendship help carry this relationship forward
every single day.

As we meet here today, as you all know, there’s violent protests in
the streets of Turkey, which raises concerns around the world,
including in my own country. To state the obvious, only Turks are
going to be able to solve their problem, but the United States stands
for certain clear principles in these circumstances: nonviolence from
both government and demonstrators; respect for the freedom of assembly
and a free and independent press.

Turkey’s future belongs to the people of Turkey and no one else. But
the United States does not pretend to be indifferent to the outcome
because we firmly believe that countries with open societies,
political systems and economies, democratic institutions and a firm
commitment to universal human rights, these are the countries that
will thrive and be the most powerful countries in the 21st century.

Today — today’s Turkey has a chance to demonstrate that there’s no
need to choose between economic advancement and democracy, between the
system that empowers the winners of elections and yet protects those
who are in the opposition.
One reason Turkey’s economy in my view, Mr. Prime Minister, has
thrived so much over the past decade is because it’s realized the
benefits of the steps it has taken toward greater political openness.
Its economy has tripled. It’s gone from the world’s 26th largest to
the 17th largest today. And Prime Minister Erdogan has a goal that it
be one of the 10 largest economies.

Turkey has brought inflation from 100 percent to 6 percent and made
its last IMF payment in May. Turkey has set a goal for it being in the
top 10 economies by 2023. And I’m confident with the right choices,
Turkey will accomplish that goal.

Toward that end, the U.S. and Turkey launched a framework for
strategic and economic commercial cooperation in 2009. We’ve already
seen a 75 percent increase. I’m preaching to the choir here, I know —
but a 75 percent increase in trade, reaching $20 billion — still much
too small, but growing with overwhelming potential as I discussed with
Prime Minister Erdogan when he was here — $5 billion dollars of U.S.
direct investment in Turkey, $1 billion of Turkey investment — direct
investment into the United States with a hope for more.

Still as the Prime Minister and I discussed when we spoke together in
front of the U.S.-Turkey Chamber of Commerce during his very
successful visit here, the potential to do more is so vast; more to
improve the business climate and attract investment, more to realize
the immense opportunities in the areas of light tech, pharmaceuticals
and energy; and more to help bright Turkish students access American
universities. Today there are already more students from Turkey at our
universities than any other country in the European Union, and we
welcome that. And we want to see more. That deepens the roots of
relationships.
And we’ve recently set up a new high-level committee that will allow
us to move forward on issues that will unlock greater trade,
investment and innovation. We’ll keep Turkey informed of the progress
of the U.S. trade talks with the EU, so that when the time is right
we’ll be able to take our trade relationship with Turkey to the next
step.

There are also encouraging signs that Turkey is willing to take
important steps forward in resolving outstanding issues with the
Kurds, the Greek Orthodox Church and others. And we hope to see a
similar vision in progress when it comes to Turkey’s longstanding
problems with Armenia and Cyprus. But these are courageous leaders
that exist now. The past is not the anchor that it’s been in the past.

We also want to keep working closely with Turkey on many strategic
challenges — the many that we both share. We’re both members of the
most powerful military alliance in history. Since 1952, Turkey has
been a member of NATO. Our commitment to the collective defense is
critical, manifest in the Patriot missile batteries in Turkey’s
border, but also the world has change. Its change, in many respects,
and our relationship today is about more than just defense. We’ve been
military allies for a long time. But it’s beyond that today.

It includes our work together on issues and organizations as diverse
as the G20, the Global Counterterrorism Forum, the challenges that are
of a changing Middle East. But just as we have in the past, we’re
going to continue to have some disagreements, we always do, as NATO
allies — and all NATO allies do. We’ve disagreed in the past with
Turkey about Israel. But Turkey understands and no one doubts that our
commitment to Israel’s security and survival is absolute. That’s why
we’re so pleased that Prime Minister Erdogan and Prime Minister
Netanyahu began to reestablish the strategic cooperation between the
two countries that they had in the past. We encourage them to keep
working constructively to repair those ties.

We will, as allies, sometimes disagree on tactics but we are all
working toward the same thing — a two-state solution, an independent
Palestinian state and a secure Israeli state; a successful Egyptian
transition; a democratic multi-ethnic nonsectarian Syria with
institutions intact; a non-nuclear Iran. On all the major issues, we
are in agreement whether or not occasionally tactically we disagree.
That is consequential.

And it falls to each of us to shore up the foundations of our strength
at home, because in the 21st century, greatness among nations is
defined not simply by the size of the country, by the dynamism of its
economy, by the openness of its — it’s more by the dynamism of its
economy, the openness of its markets and society; its ability to build
and draw on new talents of its citizens and help them deliver their
dreams. That’s the new definition as a practical matter.

Your success, Deputy Prime Minister, as an ally and as a strategic
economic and democratic partner, is profoundly — profoundly — in the
naked self-interest of the United States of America.

The Turkish people will be authors of their own future, but they
should know that the United States, Mr. Prime Minister, stands ready
— stands ready as an ally and a friend to help make that future more
secure, prosperous, and democratic as Turkey celebrates its 100th
anniversary as a republic.

That’s our goal in this relationship. Turkey is a vital ally. And the
promise that Turkey holds for the entire region as an emerging major
power, if it works, is all for the good for everybody.

So, Mr. Deputy Prime Minister, it’s always a pleasure to be with you.
We’ve had a lot of private conversations and I have no doubt about the
trajectory of your country. We’re happy to come along for the ride. We
wish you all the success in the world. And thank you all for keeping
this relationship so vibrant.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

‘200 jobs are Armenia’s benefit from Iranian gas’

`It is ArmRosGazprom, rather than Armenia, that receives gas from
Armenia. If Armenia tried to receive gas from Iran, it would encounter
difficulties’, former chairman of Central Bank of Armenia Bagrat
Asatrian told Aysor.am. He proposed saying openly that Armenia cannot
buy Iranian gas, the Russian company can do it.

Asked what benefits Armenia gets from receiving Iranian gas and
transmitting electricity to Iran in return for gas, another
participant of the press conference, parliamentary deputy Hakob
Hakobian said: `200 jobs’.

Bagrat Asatrian considered it incomprehensible that the electricity
price has increased by 28-30%, when only one third of the country’s
power supply system depends on gas.

According to Hakob Hakobian, depreciation costs were not included in
the current tariffs of electricity. IThe Public Services Regulatory
Commission said that equipment and turbines should be purchased. On
hearing these words of the deputy, Bagrat Asatrian raised his
eyebrows.

Political expert: Safarov case radically changed situation around Karabakh

ARMINFO
Friday, June 7, 15:43

Safarov case has radically changed the situation around the Karabakh
peace process provoking a huge international scandal and throwing back
the protracted negotiations, Alexander Iskandaryan, Director of the
Caucasus Institute, said at the Caucasus- 2012 international
conference in Yerevan, Friday.

“Afterwards, Baku’s all talks and promises ‘to provide Karabakh with
the highest level of autonomy’ remain beyond the logic of the
negotiation process. Glorification of a man for murder on ethnic
motives made the relations of Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan
impossible.

Iskandaryan believes that Safarov case has become a stalemate in the
stalemate for the Karabakh peace process, as there were no
opportunities to resolve the conflict even before that. So, it was
hard for the mediators even to imitate the negotiation process, he
said.

To recall, on August 31 the Armenian authorities adopted a decision to
suspend diplomatic relations and official contacts with Hungary.
President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan made public the decision at a
special meeting with the heads of diplomatic missions on Friday after
the Hungarian authorities extradited Azeri officer Ramil Safarov, who
was sentenced by a Hungarian court to life in jail for killing
sleeping Armenian officer Gurgen Margaryan with an axe in Budapest in
2004. Both the officers were undergoing an English language course
under the NATO PfP program. The same day after Safarov’s extradition,
Azeri President Ilham Aliyev decreed to pardon the criminal.

Safarov case seriously damaged the international image of Azerbaijan
and allowed Yerevan to demand sooner return of Nagorno Karabakh to the
negotiating table. President Serzh Sargsyan called Karabakh’s return
to the negotiations ‘natural and logical.’ It was thanks to the
efforts of the Minsk Group that the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign
ministers met in Paris on October 27 and agreed on further meetings.

Armenia, Lithuania interested in the deepening of cooperation

17:46 07.06.2013

The newly appointed Ambassador of Lithuania to Armenia Erikas Petrikas
handed his credentials to Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan.

President Sargsyan congratulated the Ambassador on assuming office and
wished him productive activity.

Serzh Sargsyan hailed the progress registered in the bilateral
relations in the recent years and voiced hope that the Ambassador
would take necessary steps towards further reinforcement of ties.

Ambassador Petrikas said it was a great honor for him to be
Lithuania’s Ambassador in Armenia and assured that he would do his
best to use the existing potential to deepen the cooperation between
the two countries in different spheres.

The interlocutors exchanged views on Armenian-Lithuanian relations
within the framework of the European Union.

Rosgosstrakh-Armenia assesses damage caused by falling roof of Zvartnots airport

YEREVAN, June 7. /ARKA/. Rosgosstrakh-Armenia insurance company said
today it had asked a team of independent expert to assess the amount
of damage caused to over 30 cars when the roof of VIP-hall of Yerevan
Zvartnots airport was blown off by a strong wind yesterday falling on
the parking lot.

It said independent experts arrived at the spot promptly to establish
the cause of the accident and assess the amount of damage. The company
said it had received the report about the incident at 5 p.m.

Zvartnots airport’s liabilities are insured by Rosgosstrakh Armenia.
Currently, the experts’ work is in progress, the company said, adding
also that based on the study’s result it will decide whether the
incident is subjected to insurance and if yes it will determine the
amount of compensation. The company said overall 36 cars were damaged
and no person sought medical assistance.

Rosgosstrakh Armenia was established in May 2008. It is part of
Russian Rosgosstrakh insurance company with an authorized capital of
2.98 billion drams ($ 7.2 million). The company is represented across
Armenia running 46 offices, including 18 branches, 13 sales offices in
Yerevan and 33 in large regional centers. In December 2011, it was the
first insurance company in Armenia to have been awarded by Moody’s
International a certificate of compliance with ISO 9001:2008
requirements.

Armenia International Airports runs Zvartnots airport in accordance
with a 30-year concession granted by the Armenian government in 2001.
The owner of the company is a New York-based holding company, in which
100% is owned by Argentinean businessman Eduardo Eurnekian. ($ 1 0
414.14 Drams). -0-

Development Won’t Ensure Democracy in Turkey

The New York Times
Op-Ed
June 5, 2013

By DARON ACEMOGLU

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. – FOR the past few years, there has been a general
optimism about Turkish democracy in Western capitals, especially in
Washington, thanks to the economic strides made by Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, known as the
A.K.P.

These optimists, and even those who admit that Turkish democracy has
its shortcomings, tend to subscribe to the political scientist Seymour
Martin Lipset’s famous modernization theory – the idea that greater
democratization follows automatically as a country becomes more
prosperous.
Turkey has been growing rapidly and steadily over the last 11 years,
the theory goes, so perhaps all we need is patience. By this logic,
Mr. Erdogan’s own economic success will inexorably bring an end to his
authoritarian style of government.

But modernization theory has had little success in explaining the rise
of democracy around the world. My research with Simon Johnson, James
A. Robinson and Pierre Yared has shown, for example, that countries
that have grown faster don’t show any greater tendency to become
democratic or to consolidate democratic institutions that already
exist. A few cases where democracy has followed rapid growth, as in
South Korea and Taiwan, did not occur automatically but as a result of
a combative political process – and a far more violent set of
confrontations between the military and protesters, trade unionists
and students.
And it has little relevance to this week’s protests in Turkey.
Even before the brutal suppression of the demonstrations, the belief
that Turkey was on its way to becoming a mature democracy – a role
model for the rest of the Middle East – had already become untenable.
As the A.K.P. consolidated its power, dissent was tolerated less and
less. Judicial institutions lost the little independence they’d had,
and an array of critics of the government, ranging from former
high-ranking military officers to journalists, are now in jail, in
most cases without having had a fair trial (According to the Committee
to Protect Journalists, Turkey has now surpassed China for the number
of jailed journalists.)
The bulwarks of democracy have not exactly distinguished themselves
during the past week’s events. There has been hardly any criticism of
the prime minister from within his own party (except a mild rebuke
from President Abdullah Gul).
The main opposition party, which was established by the Turkish
republic’s founding father, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, still seems trapped
in a time warp – focused solely on defending the nationalist,
secularist ideology of the Turkish state.
And the Turkish news media still seems cowed into submission, so much
so that it did not report much on how the small protests against a new
shopping center on one of the few remaining parks in Istanbul turned
into a spontaneous mass movement challenging Mr. Erdogan’s
authoritarianism. Indeed, while CNN International was reporting live
from Taksim Square, the local channel, CNN Turk, which is partly owned
by Turner Broadcasting, was airing a program on penguins.
Even so, what began as peaceful protests by a few hundred
demonstrators in Taksim Square could define Turkish democracy for
years to come – for two reasons.
First, democracy doesn’t just take place at the polls, especially when
the choices on the ballot are as unappealing as they have been in
Turkey. British democracy came of age in the 19th century partly as a
result of protests in the streets, which not only led to the
enfranchisement of the previously disenfranchised but also to the
formation of the Labour Party, offering new options to voters. Large
numbers of people pouring into the street in several Turkish cities,
even in the face of heavy-handed police action, may be Turkish
democracy’s coming-of-age moment.
Second, there is a real chance that these protests, and the political
movements that they might spawn, will transcend the deep-rooted but
stale political divisions of the last two decades, divisions captured
pithily by Recep Tayyip Erdogan when he said in 1998: `In this country
there is a segregation of Black Turks and White Turks. Your brother
Tayyip belongs to the Black Turks.’
In Turkey, these terms have nothing to do with skin color. `White
Turks’ are the well-educated, wealthy secular elites who see
themselves as the defenders of Ataturk’s legacy. They are often
associated with government bureaucracy, the military and big
businesses in major Turkish cities. `Black Turks’ are those that the
White Turks look down upon as poorly educated, lower class and trapped
by their piety. Elites tend to view them as peasants or being unable
to shake off their peasant heritage.
Although the Turkish military periodically used religion as a weapon
in its struggle against the political left, particularly after the
1980 military coup, by the 1990s the most important challenge to the
secular elite’s rule came from religious conservative parties, who
unabashedly represented the Black Turks.
In 1997, the military toppled a government led by the A.K.P.’s
predecessor, the Welfare Party, which was subsequently shut down by
the constitutional court. It similarly threatened the A.K.P. in 2007,
with the Constitutional Court again following at its coattails and
threatening to ban the party because its religious outlook violated
the Turkish Constitution. Particularly troubling for the secular
elite was the fact that the wife of the new president, Mr. Gul, wore a
head scarf, something banned in public spaces by the Constitution.
Since 1997, these divisions have defined Turkish politics. The
military failed and the A.K.P. withstood the challenge. Turkey has
become more democratic in the sense that the previously
disenfranchised have become empowered. But it has not taken many steps
toward liberal democracy. On the contrary, Turkish society has become
more polarized between supporters of secular orthodoxy and the A.K.P.,
which, under Mr. Erdogan’s leadership, has used its newly acquired
power to exact revenge on the military, secular elites and its other
critics with increasingly authoritarian certitude.
This week’s protests are unlikely to topple the government or even
force an about-face by the prime minister. Their import lies in their
symbolism.
Suddenly, there is a diverse group of people pouring into the streets
to demand not handouts or policy concessions but a voice in Turkish
politics. The protesters are not hard-core opposition supporters
wishing to turn the clock back to the secular orthodoxy of yore but
young urbanites frustrated by the A.K.P.’s increasingly unresponsive
monopoly on power.
As in 19th-century Britain, if the ballot box doesn’t offer the right
choices, democracy advances by direct action.
The danger in Turkey is that hard-liners in the A.K.P. will use these
events to further divide society. They are already painting a picture
in which the protests are an attempt to claw back the newly acquired
powers of the previously disenfranchised, labeling the young men and
women in the streets as alcoholics, looters and leftists.
These hard-liners have been aided by the Turkish news media, which,
with a few exceptions, still obediently toes the party line. In the
short run, they may well succeed, further polarizing Turkish politics
and cementing the A.K.P.’s control over state institutions.
What makes these events a turning point, however, is that the
discontent of a large segment of the Turkish public is now out in the
open, and even if the Turkish media continues to ignore it, the
knowledge of this discontent will spread. The genie is out of the
bottle. Neither it nor Turkish democracy can be put back.

Daron Acemoglu, a professor of economics at M.I.T., is the co-author,
with James A. Robinson, of `Economic Origins of Dictatorship and
Democracy’ and `Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and
Poverty.’

MANIFESTATION DEVANT L’AMBASSADE DE RUSSIE A EREVAN

La Russie est consideree comme le partenaire strategique et l’alliee
de l’Armenie, mais dans les faits, elle prend des mesures qui visent a
affaiblir l’Armenie. C’est autour de ce constat que se sont rassembles
plusieurs manifestants devant l’ambassade de Russie a Erevan le 5 juin,
pour protester contre la hausse des tarifs du gaz naturel russe livre
a l’Armenie.

Le collectif “Empechons la hausse du prix du gaz”, a l’initiative de
cette manifestation, s’etonne de l’attitude de la Russie, qui n’est en
rien compatible, fait remarquer Argishti Kiviryan, membre du collectif,
avec son statut d’allie militaire.

Un allie doit aider son partenaire a devenir plus fort, or la Russie
prend des mesures qui tendent a l’affaiblir, s’offusque le militant,
en constatant que ce n’est pas la première fois qu’elle agit ainsi.

” La Russie augmente regulièrement les tarifs des ressources
energetiques qu’elle livre a l’Armenie “, ajoute M. Kiviryan, dans
une allusion aux nombreuses crises provoquees entre les deux allies
par les menaces de Moscou relatives a une hausse de la facture gazière.

De son côte, Silva Adamyan, autre membre du collectif, a precise que
l’objectif de son mouvement etait d’arreter l’augmentation de ces
tarifs, voire de les baisser. Une lettre adressee a l’ambassade de
Russie a ce sujet a ete lue par un responsable du collectif, l’ancien
candidat a la presidence Andreas Ghukasyan, qui a rappele que plus
d’un tiers des Armeniens vivait en dessous du seuil de pauvrete,
et que la hausse annoncee des prix du gaz, en provoquant la hausse
des prix d’autres produits de consommation, ne pourrait qu’aggraver
le phenomène, et provoquer un malaise social, voire un mouvement
de revolte.

La menace russe d’une nouvelle augmentation du tarif du gaz naturel
livre a l’Armenie a jete un froid dans les relations armeno-russes. Le
president armenien Serge Sarkissian a denonce la mesure annoncee
par la Russie, et certains analystes politiques ont interprete son
absence aux derniers sommets strategiques sous l’egide de la Russie
comme un signal adresse a Moscou.

vendredi 7 juin 2013, Gari ©armenews.com

NATIONAL TEAM START PREPARATIONS FOR MATCH AGAINST ARMENIA

Malta Today, Malta
May 6 2013

A 22 man squad, today started preparations for Friday’s encounter
with Armenia.

After a well deserved rest from travelling, national team coach Pietro
Ghedin took out his team for the fist of the scheduled training
sessions in advance of Malta’s sixth qualifier in this campaign. A
campaign which sees Malta yet to register a positive result.

Apart from missing Andrei Agius (club commitments) and Daniel
Bogdanovic (injured) Mr. Ghedin has the rare luxury of a squad of 22
players, which includes also some newcomers.

Malta will face Armenia on Friday at 18.00hrs (C.E.T).