Author: Kanayan Tamar

I am Well Aware of the Inefficiency and Inability of the Governing System
from the Inside of the System Itself

Friday, 15 June 2012 08:56

Karabakh-open.info’s interview with NKR National Assembly deputy, candidate
for the NKR President’s post, hero of Artsakh Vitali Balasanyan.

*- A Facebook user asked you a question concerning the 2005 parliamentary
elections. You lost those elections in the plurality system to your
opponent then. The electoral district comprised the defensive area of
Askeran region where you were a commander. How are you going to
winin the whole
country having lost the parliamentary elections in a region
where you are held in high esteem by the inhabitants?*

– I was first elected a deputy from Askeran region in 1991; I was a deputy
of the first convocation parliament. My defeat in the 2005 plurality system
elections was stipulated by the application of the enormous management
reserves and the atmosphere of fear and intimidation created by the
authorities. Opposition candidate Eduard Aghabekyan’s victory in the 2004
elections for Stepanakert’s mayor’s post served a reason for President
Arkadi Ghoukasyan to exert all the efforts for the defeat of all the
opposition candidates nominated in the plurality electoral system. I was
then a member of the opposition `ARF-Dashnaktsutsyun/Movement-88′ coalition
and was elected a deputy from their proportional electoral system list.

*- What served a reason for your nomination in the upcoming presidential
elections?*

– I am not an occasional figure in this country, I have certain programmes
and I am ready to implement them all. In order not to carry out pre-term
election talk I would rather touch upon the reasons for my nomination
during my election campaign.

*- What caused you to support Bako Sahakyan’s candidacy in 2007?*

– My decision was mainly stipulated by the social character of Bako
Sahakyan’s electoral
programmewhich I
accepted and was sure that he would manage to implement it. Five
years ago many of us elected today’s government with confidence in the
pre-election promises and with hope for real changes. Yet the years past
showed that our authorities had little to do with the principles and
programmes they had declared.

*- In 2007 you were a member of the opposition
`ARF-Dashnaktsutsyun/Movement-88′ parliamentary faction yet both
Dashnaktsutsyun and `Movement-88′ supported Bako Sahakyan in the
presidential elections. Why did these parties determine to change the
political stage?*

– I think you had better address the question to these parties. If they
supported Bako Sahakyan they are to bear responsibility for the
consequences of the policy and the activities carried out by the President.
I consider time showed that the parties had adopted a wrong decision which
resulted first of all in the default of the democratic political system of
Artsakh.

*- Within the period of 2007-2010 you were the aide to NKR President Bako
Sahakyan. Why did you resign?*

– Having worked as the aide to the NKR President I am well aware of the
inefficiency of the governing system and the authorities’ inability to
accept any advice or suggestions.
Today’s situation endangers the Karabakh conflict settlement in favour of
the Armenian nation, the development of our country, the prosperous life of
our citizens. The social injustice in the society causes disappointment and
pessimism which makes many of our compatriots leave the country the defense
of which cost the lives of thousands of Armenians.
This situation is unacceptable and requires changes. The years past have
shown that the authorities are unable to introduce any changes and if the
affairs remain as they
are the situation in the country will become tighter. The disagreement over
the policy carried out by the President led to my resignation.

*- In 2010 no opposition party had its participation in the parliamentary
elections because of which the democratic image of Artsakh greatly
suffered. There are certain opinions that the political forces predicted
the results of those elections. You were elected an NA deputy from the ARF
proportional election list. Was it a deal and what was your role in it?*

– I am generally against deals in politics. I do not exclude the fact that
some official circles could have arranged deals. Yet the political
experience of Armenia showed the failure of the parties and political
figures making deals. Being a non-party deputy I had no influence on the
ARF decisions. My standpoints of opposition and dissidence are quite
distinct: the different branches of the state authority and the state
system in general should function so that to secure the efficient activity
of the political opposition, to give way to dissidence, freedom of speech,
development of an independent media institution, the establishment of the
fourth estate. The one-pole system created during the latest years serves a
great obstacle for the development of Artsakh.

*- Another Facebook user believes that you became a deputy due to the
authority of the ARF-Dashnaktsutsyun. Do you agree with this statement?*

– Definitely no. As I have already mentioned I became a deputy still during
the first convocation parliament, in the elections of 2005 and 2010 I was
candidate number two in the proportional electoral list. I had quite
successful cooperation with the Dashnaktsutsyun party, during the campaign
we supplemented each other and gained a greater public confidence. Our
cooperation was not developed entirely due to the authority of either of
us. I am sure of the further development of my collaboration with the
high-principled members of the party.

*- Certain circles of the society are suspicious about the differences in
the governing methods of General of the National Security Service Bako
Sahakyan and General of the Defense Army Vitali Balasanyan. How are you
going to argue against the matter?*

– I have already touched upon the problem when speaking about the role of
the opposition. I assure the differences will be obvious still during the
campaign when I will present my election programme which was worked out
after consultations with experts; my team involves specialists who know for
sure the ways of realizing the programme. Concerning my being a military
man I will say that during the latest 13 years I held different political
posts, most of them elected ones. Participating in a number of election
campaigns I am conscious of the needs and expectations of our people and
also I have much to do with the views of the youth and freethinking people.

*- Before becoming a deputy you had held the post of the NKR Deputy Defense
Minister. Your resignation has been a mystery for the society so far. What
was the problem?*

– I was given no reasons upon demobilization but obviously the act was
performed through the violation of the law. You had better ask the question
those having adopted this decision then, they might tell you the reasons.

*- Your nomination supposes that you do not agree with the policy carried
out by the authorities. What do you especially disagree with?*

– During our conversation I have already mentioned some of the reasons. The
main problem is the day by day worsening social situation in the country,
the actual growth of poverty, the decay of the living standards of village
inhabitants.
The greatest problem for me is the Karabakh conflict settlement in favour
of the Armenian nation; no progress has been recorded in the process yet.
The NKR foreign policy is at a total standstill, having no Foreign Minister
for about a year is a testimony of the statement. We should aim to achieve
the international recognition of Artsakh and, therefore, gain the
opportunity to consolidate the security of our country by means different
political methods.

President Sargsyan visits the British Embassy on the Birthday of Her
Majesty Queen Elisabeth II

armradio.am
15.06.2012 12:05

President Serzh Sargsyan visited the Embassy of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Armenia on the occasion of the
National day of the UK – the Birthday of Her Majesty Queen Elisabeth
II.

The President congratulated Ambassador Jonathan James and the staff of
the Embassy on the National Day.

Serzh Sargsyan underlined that with her activity the Queen has earned
the respect and love of not only her nationals, but also many peoples
of the world.

President Sargsyan and Ambassador Jonathan James discussed issues
related to the development of Armenian-British relations and the
expansion of cooperation.

Line of contact: Baku again rejects snipers withdrawal

Karabakh | 15.06.12 | 12:02

Azerbaijan effectively rejected the renewed international calls for
the parties to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to unconditionally
withdraw snipers from `the line of contact’ and agree to joint
investigations of growing truce violations there, RFE/RL Armenian
service reports.

Irish Foreign Minister Eamon Gilmore, the chairman-in-office of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, voiced such calls
when visiting Yerevan and Baku this week. He reportedly insisted on
the need for a concrete mechanism for such investigations after talks
with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov on Thursday.

News reports quoted Mammadyarov as saying that Baku agrees with the
idea, advanced by international mediators, in principle. `But that
mechanism could work only when Armenian troops start withdrawing from
Azerbaijan’s occupied territories,’ he said, according to the APA news
agency. `Only in that case can the mechanism be put into action.’

`If we start applying that mechanism now, that will only mean
reinforcing the status quo, which is unacceptable,’ Mammadyarov told a
joint news conference with Gilmore.

`If Armenia does not want its soldiers to die, then it must liberate
Azerbaijan’s lands. If this happens, there will be no need for
snipers,’ added the Azerbaijani foreign minister.

The Armenian side has voiced support for both sniper withdrawal and
joint investigations. Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian reaffirmed
this stance after his meeting with Gilmore on Tuesday.

U.S. professor calls for better study of iconography in Armenia

June 15, 2012 – 12:15 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – Prof. Thomas F. Mathews, emeritus professor at New
York University’s Institute of Fine Arts, recently gave a talk on the
role of Armenian architecture in the international arena, at Columbia
University, The Armenian Mirror-Spectator reports.

The event was sponsored by the Armenian Center at Columbia University
and co-sponsored by the National Association for Armenian Studies and
Research (NAASR) and Columbia’s Art History Department.

Mathews, along with Dr. Helen Evans of the Metropolitan Museum of Art,
had been the curator of the 1994 exhibition, `Treasures in Heaven:
Armenian Illuminated Manuscripts,’ featuring Armenian illuminated
manuscripts at the Morgan Library and Museum, with curatorial
assistant Dr. Sylvie Merian.

In Armenian literature, there are voluminous sources of Armenia’s
conversion to Christianity. However, the most neglected treatise is
the Treatise on Images by Vertanes of Kertogh, which has been
translated by Dr. Sirarpie Der Nersessian. An article on this treatise
was published a few years ago by Mathews in the Revue des Etudes
Armenienne, Vol 31, 2008-2009. `Vertanes is the Pliny of Armenia,’
stated Mathews. His seventh-century Intellectual Dialogue on the
Christian Use of Icons, written in Dvin, is the earliest defense of
icons, and Vertanes mentions the wood materials and even the pigments
used with Persian names. These include icons of Christ, Peter and
Paul, the Mother of God and Saints Gregory and Hripsime.

Mathews said that the next important intellectual in this field was
John of Damascus who was secretary to the patriarch of Jerusalem in
the early eighth century. `The Byzantine rulers forbade the use of
icons because the people were worshipping the icons almost as idols
and not as symbols of Christianity or the Christian saints,’ he
explained. `This was the cause of a huge conflict between the Greeks
and Armenians, both doctrinally and ecclesiastically,’ he said. `The
icon phenomenon is larger than Byzantium.’

There is no evidence of icons in Armenia before the Arabs sacked Dvin
in 640 AD, because Armenian icons were painted on wood panels, which
are perishable, he said. In Egypt, the wood panels in St. Catherine’s
Monastery in Sinai survived because of the dry climate and because the
monks protected them.

There were stone icons in Armenia, which due to their weight did not
travel and their iconography was inspired by the wood icons
transported to Armenia. The stone relief in the Odzun church, which is
made of different stone than the rest of the church, dates before the
eighth century, the scholar said. `This relief was widely used in the
Byzantine world.’ There is a carved relief on a four-sided stone stele
at Harichavank where Mother Mary is wearing a necklace, and which has
been compared with the necklace on the Maria Regina icon in Rome,
561-579. There is also archeological evidence of stone reliefs at
Louvre, France, which were copies of Christian icons, and inspired by
the wood icons in Armenia. `Obviously all this iconography circulated
because they were painted on wooden panels.’

The Dvin Crucifixion, which is three feet high with a double-armed
cross, reveals the body of Christ gone, but His face enshrined in a
halo of glory. There are also horsemen on the side. This cross with
the human face `is the most complete venerating image,’ Mathews said,
adding that the crucifixion `is the first and most formidable problem
of theology. And this `Christ in Glory’ iconography is found from
Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Anatolia, Armenia and Constantinople to
Rome.’

Armenia is part of this larger world, which centers on this concept of
Christ on the cross. Mathews believes that the iconography for the
Dvin relief was based on a second-century wooden triptych from Egypt.
This would explain how the iconography of the horses got to Dvin: on a
wooden icon, the crucifix icon is on a cross with a pair of horsemen.

For Armenia, `there aren’t ancient treatises. There is art and
sculpture. However, iconography in Armenia still has to be
investigated,’ he said in conclusion.

ARMENIE
La partie azerbaïdjanaise aurait perdu au moins 47 soldats

Dans un entretien à Hayots Achkhar, le politologue Levon
Melik-Chahnazarian relève, citant des sources fiables, que depuis
l’incident du 4 juin qui a coûté la vie à 3 soldats arméniens, la
partie azerbaïdjanaise aurait perdu au moins 47 soldats. Selon lui, la
partie arménienne a ainsi donné une réponse appropriée aux
provocations azéries. Si la panique semble gagner les habitants
d’Erevan, la population des régions frontalières garde son calme,
prête à prendre les armes à chaque instant. D’après ce politologue,
tout incident frontalier contribue à ce que les forces armées
arméniennes deviennent plus vigilantes. « Si Aliev avait un grain
d’intelligence, il mettrait fin à la tuerie de ses soldats et punirait
publiquement quelques-uns de ses commandants, car perdre une
cinquantaine de soldats en deux ou trois jours dans des conditions de
non-guerre est un coup dur pour n’importe quel pays », dit-il.

Dans un entretien au même quotidien, Rouben Safrastian, turcologue,
directeur de l’Institut de l’Orientalogie, regrette qu’à ce jour ni
les Etats-Unis, ni les autres pays du Groupe de Minsk n’aient
clairement condamné l’agression de l’Azerbaïdjan, leurs déclarations
étant très vagues, selon lui. L’absence de message ciblé de la part de
Washington ou des autres pays médiateurs sur l’inadmissibilité d’un
tel comportement de la part de Bakou risque d’encourager celui-ci à se
montrer plus insolent et à se sentir plus libre dans ses actions.

Haykakan Jamanak reproduit un entretien avec Davit Babayan, «
porte-parole » du « Président » Bako Sahakian, qui estime peu probable
que les incidents frontaliers des derniers jours dégénèrent en
opérations militaires. L’Azerbaïdjan a juste voulu tester les
capacités et la vigilance des forces arméniennes et faire un chantage
vis-à-vis des Etats-Unis, dont la Secrétaire d’Etat se trouvait dans
la région, pour lui faire passer des messages. L’Azerbaïdjan ne
déclenchera une nouvelle guerre que lorsqu’il sera sûr de sa victoire
dans un court laps de temps. D’après M. Babayan, le Conseil de
sécurité de l’ONU doit nécessairement réagir aux actions de
l’Azerbaïdjan.

Selon Hayots Achkhar, se référant au centre d’études des journalistes
militaires d’Azerbaïdjan, au cours des mois janvier-juin 2012,
l’Azerbaïdjan aurait perdu 52 soldats sur la seule ligne de contact du
HK, 46 autres ayant été blessés.

Ambassade de France en Arménie

Service de presse

vendredi 15 juin 2012,
Stéphane ©armenews.com

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
June 15 2012

Water pumping from Sevan to be doubled

Armenia plans to increase water pumping from Lake Sevan for irrigation
from 170 million to 320 million cubic meters, ARKA reports.

The Aparan Water Reservoir had only 91 million cubic meters of water
last year and 51 million this year, the Azat Water Reservoir had 71
million last year and 60 million this year.

130-150 million cubic meters were pumped last year, 100-110 million
cubic meters are planned this year, head of the State Committee for
Water Economy said at the governmental session on Thursday.

Use of Sevan water was first made in the second half of June, about 80
million cubic meters have been used this year. New quotas for water
usage would allow irrigation of 40,000 hectares. Lack of water
resources will keep the price for water at 11 drams per cubic meter.

Lake Sevan is one of the largest highland lakes in Europe and Asia,
located at the Armenian Highlands at a height of 1914 meters. It had a
water level of 1900.13 meters on January 1, 2012.

Trend, Azerbaijan
June 14 2012

OSCE calls to continue working on main principles of Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict settlement

Azerbaijan, Baku, June 14 / Trend A. Badalova/

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was at the centre of discussions during
the visit to Baku and the region, the OSCE chairperson, Irish Deputy
Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Eamon
Gilmore said at a press conference in Baku today.
“The OSCE calls on the sides to continue work on the main principles,
to refrain from the use of force and to remove snipers from the
Armenian-Azerbaijani contact line,” he said.

The time has come to build up confidence and trust,” he said. “OSCE
supports the efforts of the Minsk Group.” He recalled that the OSCE
makes all decisions on the basis of consensus.

“This is the only organisation in the world with 56 member states
which come to an agreement on the basis of consensus,” Gilmore said.

He also said that the OSCE has clear principles for the peaceful
settlement of conflicts.

“That is why, we have created a set of principles,” he said. “The
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict may be resolved on the basis of these
principles. These principles will be agreed with the countries
concerned.”

Gilmore said that the OSCE will continue working for the parties to
come to a peaceful settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 per cent of Azerbaijan since 1992,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.
Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994.

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

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

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
June 14 2012

Armenia’s Republican Party to discuss new government

The executive committee of the Republican Party of Armenia will
discuss the new parliament on Friday, its press secretary and Vice
Speaker of Parliament Eduard Sharmazanov said, News Armenia reports.

Preliminary talks will be hosted by the party’s leader and Armenian
President Serzh Sargsyan today.

The government resigned on May 31. Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan was
appointed on June 2. He had 20 days to form a government after the
appointment. He will announced it on June 15. Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian, Defense Minister Seyran Oganyan and Minister for
Emergencies Armen Yeritsyan will remain in office.

DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
June 13, 2012 Wednesday

IT STARTED SMELLING GUNPOWDER IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH

Russia prefers not to interfere into the confrontation between Armenia
and Azerbaijan

by Yury Roks
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, June 08, 2012, p. 1
[translated from Russian]

TENSION BETWEEN BAKU AND YEREVAN REACHED AN UNPRECEDENTED LEVEL FOR
THE LAST FEW YEARS; Several subversion acts were stopped in the
Armenian regions bordering Azerbaijan this week alone. After that
clashes happened on the contact line in unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh.
There were killed and injured people on both sides. The US, France and
Turkey expressed their concern about the events. Russia, strategic
ally of Armenia and simultaneously a partner of Azerbaijan, was the
last to react.

Several subversion acts were stopped in the Armenian regions bordering
Azerbaijan this week alone. After that clashes happened on the contact
line in unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh. There were killed and injured
people on both sides. The US, France and Turkey expressed their
concern about the events. Russia, strategic ally of Armenia and
simultaneously a partner of Azerbaijan, was the last to react.

Washington, Ankara and Paris called on the parties to stop escalation
of tension almost simultaneously. Armenia accused the Azerbaijani
party of what was going on in a harsh form.

Azerbaijan responded with a counter accusation, afterwards it
characterized the events as consequences of lack of control in the
Armenian armed forces and the General Staff finally announced, “Ten
days are sufficient for our country to liberate the occupied
territories and to reach the state borders of Iran and Armenia. The
only reason that stops us is that we do not wish bloodshed and victims
anymore.” Armenian mass media quoting this statement actively called
it an irrefutable evidence of aggressive plans of the neighboring
country.

Head of the information department of the President of
Nagorno-Karabakh David Babayan said, “Azerbaijan may try to distort
the facts in any way but they are obvious: subversions are stopped on
the Armenian land. Baku may release any kinds of belligerent
statements but it is impossible to intimidate us. We are always
prepared to resist.” According to Babayan, the actions taken by the
Azerbaijani party devaluate the already difficult negotiation process
and also make the statements of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
released during a visit to the region that new approaches would be
offered to the parties for resolving of the conflict unimportant.”

Babayan said, “After a series of provocations on the part of
Azerbaijan we have a right to expect that the US Department of State
will make corrections to its strategy for resolving of the conflict.
Azerbaijan regularly breaches the ceasefire regime and kills Armenian
soldiers but is simultaneously a temporary member of the UN Security
Council. This is absurd. The US should provide a more realistic
evaluation of the situation and change its position about this issue,
which will probably happen.”

Snor Asatryan, press secretary of the Defense Ministry of
Nagorno-Karabakh, said that the Azerbaijani party breached the
ceasefire regime more than 5,000 times on the contact line of the
armed forces of Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan between January and
June of 2012. He said, “In June alone, the Azerbaijani party performed
six reconnaissance subversion actions in which it lost 20 servicemen.”

These terrible statistical data are confirmed by the center of
research of military journalists of Azerbaijan. According to data of
the organization to which some news agencies referred, between January
and June of 2012 the armed forces of Azerbaijan lost 52 people killed.
The Armenian party also has losses, although smaller ones. This year
alone, not less than eight people died during the clashes.

At a representative conference in Washington-based center of Woodrow
Wilson the leading conflict experts of the West specializing in the
South Caucasus drew a conclusion that the international community
needs to interfere urgently to prevent a full-scale conflict probably
even before the meeting of the foreign ministers of Armenia and
Azerbaijan to be held in Paris on June 18.

Sabine Fraser, director of the European program of the international
crisis group, said, “There is a real danger that the conflict will go
out of control and the parties will start taking revenge on each other
for each loss. As soon as this happens it will be very difficult for
them to retreat or to win a war quickly.”

Alarming opinions were also sounded in Yerevan. An opinion about a
need for interference of the CSTO forces into the growing conflict was
even expressed on the expert level because several subversion acts of
Azerbaijan took place not in Nagorno-Karabakh but in Armenia being a
member of the CSTO and having a right to count on assistance according
to this doctrine. In any case, the quantity of supporters of this idea
is very small yet.

Babayan said, “Insertion of troops of the third party into the
conflict zone is not that simple. Agreement of all parties of the
conflict and participants of negotiations is necessary, it is
necessary to sign the relevant agreements, to settle a lot of nuances
etc. the Azerbaijani-Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is unique because it is
the only conflict in the world in which there is no one between the
armed forces of the parties. This remains a good indicator of the
potential for peaceful coexistence of the two nations still but for
the regular firing exchange.”

Well-known Armenian political analyst Alexander Iskandaryan commented
on the situation and expressed his hope that “there will be no
Armenian-Azerbaijani war.” Iskandaryan said, “The incidents are aimed
at the internal political life of Azerbaijan and the visit of the US
Secretary of State. Azerbaijan organizes propaganda actions and simply
fails. But I am afraid that it will be difficult to stop them.”

The authorities of Armenia comment on the events in a harsher way.
President Serzh Sargsian being on an official visit to Japan
announced, “Either the provocations were organized according to an
order of the authorities of Azerbaijan and in this case they bore
personal responsibility for breaching of the truce, and international
obligation undertake by Azerbaijan or the armed forces of this country
were outside of control of the command and in this case we should be
ready to deal with separate field commanders and not with an organized
army.” According to him, it is sad that the provocations coincide with
the events organized by Russia and aimed at strengthening of
confidence (a meeting of representatives of intelligentsia of Armenia
and Azerbaijan took place in Moscow) and the State Secretary of the US
– co-chair of the Minsk OSCE group, patron of the negotiation process,
has been in the region.

A long absence of a public reaction of Moscow declaring the South
Caucasus a traditional zone of its geopolitical interests was
surprising against the background of the highest tension between
Yerevan and Baku and calls of the US, France, Turkey and OSCE for
peace. Only in the second half of Thursday official spokesperson for
the Russian Foreign Ministry Alexander Lukashevich expressed a hope
that meeting of the foreign ministers of the two countries in Paris
would relieve the tension and the parties would manifest reservation.

[translated from Russian]

WAR AND PEACE: AN INTERVIEW WITH NKR PRIME MINISTER ARA HAROUTYUNYAN
by Nanore Barsoumian

June 14, 2012

On May 2, Armenian Weekly Assistant Editor Nanore Barsoumian sat down
with Nagorno Karabagh Republic (NKR) Prime Minister Ara Haroutyunyan
in his Stepanakert office to discuss the challenges facing the young
republic. Below is the full text of the interview.

Ara Haroutyunyan (Photo by Nanore Barsoumian) Nanore Barsoumian-Thank
you for this opportunity. First, I want to ask you about Karabagh’s
domestic politics, and then discuss regional issues.

Ara Haroutyunyan-In regards to domestic issues, of course Karabagh
is a young republic, only 20 years old, and it still doesn’t have a
state-building tradition. However, it already has a direction; it has
chosen the principles of democracy. We are moving ahead with those
principles. The government is being shaped by the will of the people,
expressed through elections. The most fundamental achievement is our
steadfast and firm march towards state-building. We have many domestic
issues, social problems, and problems with infrastructure. After
the Soviet years, and the devastation of the war, we have inherited
a tattered economy, and we face the challenge of reviving that
economy-in fact, not only reviving it, but bringing it up to step
with the scientific and technological developments of the day. Solving
these problems requires large financial resources. We are moving ahead
step by step. Every year new construction projects are completed,
but we still have a long way to go. We consider the development of
our economy as the most important issue of the day, as it will also
provide a way for us to solve other problems.

Regionally, little has been accomplished. There is no political
progress with Azerbaijan, although negotiations are ongoing.

Azerbaijan is not ready for a compromise. And as far as we are
concerned, one-sided compromises will never happen. That is why
the status quo has been maintained by force until today. Of course,
ceasefire violations continue. When faced with gunfire from the Azeri
side, we respond. Broadly speaking, however, peace has reigned for
some years now, and I am convinced that this will continue.

N.B.-Despite Aliyev’s jingoistic language and the increase in the
government’s weapons procurement?

A.H.-Yes, despite all that. We know that Aliyev’s announcements are
first and foremost for internal consumption. The Azeri leadership and
the international community realize full well the devastation that
could be caused by renewed conflict in the region, as well as the
unpredictable consequences of the resumption of hostilities, which is
why I am convinced that we won’t have another war. As far as weapons
procurement is concerned, we are not falling behind. Armenia’s and
Artsakh’s defense armies are equipped with the required weapons and
ammunition to maintain the status quo. We never fall back. We just
don’t talk as much about it. Our level of preparedness is in no way
less than that of the Azeri armed forces.

N.B.-Going back to the domestic issues, how is the state of the
villages in Karabagh? I have been told during my interviews here
that rural migration and urban drift, especially to Stepanakert,
are problems.

A.H.-I agree. That problem exists throughout the world, including
Karabagh, where the youth prefer life in the cities. However, measures
must be taken so that the youth stay-especially because those villages
are the embodiment of our fundamental achievements. They constitute the
first line of defense against a multitude of challenges. What are we
doing about this? We are trying to create a conducive environment for
the development of our rural economy…through increased construction
and modernization in rural areas, so that villages become more
self-sufficient.

N.B.-Talk about the budget allocations to different projects.

A.H.-Funds are invested in all sectors. We invest in infrastructure:
on building roads, schools, kindergartens, houses, and hospitals. We
are working in all directions, but unfortunately, we face serious
financial challenges.

N.B.-The Azeri government has launched an aggressive worldwide campaign
on the “Khojali genocide.” What measures have been taken to counter
these efforts?

A.H.-Of course this issue concerns not only us, but also Armenia and
the diaspora. We need to struggle against this together. Lobbying
plays a central role in international diplomacy; we have our diaspora,
Azerbaijan has money. Various countries have interests in Azerbaijan.

If in the past we had the upper hand and broader reach through our
diaspora, then today Azerbaijan’s financial resources have closed
the gap. Azeri resistance and political activism has become palpable
in different countries. First and foremost, we need to redouble the
efforts of the diaspora. Also, by joining forces, we need to produce
and disseminate information to counter Azeri propaganda. We absolutely
need to wage this struggle together. I am convinced that with every
passing year this struggle will only become harder, and we are going
to rely more heavily on political activism in the Armenian Diaspora.

N.B.-Turkey and Azerbaijan are also trying to harness their
diasporas…

A.H.-Yes, and not only their diasporas. Their wealth allows them to
buy support.

N.B.-It was recently reported in the news that Israel wishes to attack
Iran through Azerbaijan. What would that mean for Karabagh?

A.H.-Any war in this region will have a negative impact not only on
Karabagh, but the region as a whole. War is not desired. Instability
in the region-whether economic, social, or otherwise-is not desired.

The likelihood of such a scenario is slim. They all realize that Iran
is one of the more powerful states in the region. It has a large
army, and a guiding ideology. The issue needs to be solved through
negotiations. Iran is not an easy morsel to swallow. It is a few
thousand-year-old civilization, and it has always been one of those
countries that has a say, has an impact.

N.B.-What factors would influence a solution to the Karabagh issue?

A.H.-First and foremost it is dependent on the will of our people. Of
course, there are interests involved. Major powers are attempting to
formulate a solution to the Karabagh issue. But if their proposals are
not satisfactory to us, they won’t get anywhere. Azerbaijani oil plays
a role. The Russian influence is also a factor. U.S. interests play a
part, as do Georgian-Azeri relations. And Iran. Ultimately, however,
the solution is dependent on our people, and the people of Azerbaijan.

Where we stand and what we envision are paramount.

N.B.-And what solution do you envision?

A.H.-The solution will very much resemble the current status quo.

That’s how I envision it. However, time and a generational shift
are necessary for people to come to terms with the status quo, and
accept it.

N.B.-What about the recognition of NKR?

A.H.-Recognition will come, but it is not a matter of 5 or 10 years.

To accomplish it, we need to have a strong economy, a unified nation:
Armenian Diaspora, Armenia, and Karabagh. We all need to work toward
the recognition of Karabagh, and I am convinced that we will be
successful.