Author: Karabekian Emil

RUSSIA ALSO COMMITS ADULTERY, THE MARXIST SAYS

Lragir.am
14:08:14 – 06/11/2008

The leader of the Marxist Party, member of the Armenian National
Congress Davit Hakobyan stated November 6 at the Pastark press club
that Russia which he used to admire and consider Armenia’s ally showed
in the meeting of the presidents of Armenia, Russia and Azerbaijan
in Moscow on November 2 that like West, it also commits adultery and
applies double standard.

Davit Hakobyan said the Russian president was under the influence of
the oil and gas interests of his retinue, and is violating Russia’s
interests.

According to Hakobyan, if Russia wants to influence Azerbaijan, it
can do it through the agreement of Gyulistan, declaring Karabakh its
internal subject, which, according to Davit Hakobyan, the Armenian
people would not mind.

And pleasing Azerbaijan through returning the seven territories to
Azerbaijan which Putin and Medvedev are doing now is clear idiotism,
Davit Hakobyan says.

By the way, commenting at the request of reporters on the naming of
the square near the statue of Miasnikyan the Square of Russia where
March 1 took place, Davit Hakobyan said it was an act of adultery
of the Armenian government with Russia, while Russia is sacrificing
Armenia on its altar of diplomatic victories.

MUSAVAT PARTY: "THE DECLARATION, SIGNED IN MOSCOW, CREATES UNFAVORABLE CONDITIONS FOR AZERBAIJAN"

Today.Az
s/politics/48733.html
Nov 4 2008
Azerbaijan

The Musavat party Divan held a session Monday, reports Day.Az with
reference to the press service for the party.

The session participants discussed the sociopolitical situation in
the country and the further plans, Musavat intends to execute in the
near future.

The Musavat party adopted a special statement due to the possible
shutdown of the Azadlyg, Voice of America and BBC radio stations. The
party considers that by such actions the powers want to put a pressure
on freedom of speech and press again.

Moreover, the participants considered the issue of the recent meeting
of presidents of Azerbaijan, Russia and Armenia in Moscow. The
party considers that signing of a joint declaration and inclusion
of regulations about issues settlement in line with Madrid proposals
create unfavorable conditions for Azerbaijan.

The party considers that the resolution of the Karabakh problem on
the basis of Madrid declaration challenges the territorial integrity
and sovereignty of Azerbaijan.

Moreover, the session participants considered the issue regarding
the upcoming session of the party. During the session the party will
adopt a plan of actions for 2009.

Politkom.ru website, Moscow
Oct 21 2008

Russia and Armenia: A psychological easing of tensions

by Sergey Markedonov, candidate of historical sciences, head of the
International Relations Department of the Institute for Political and
Military Analysis

On 20 October 2008 Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev visited
Yerevan. At first glance (at least from outward appearances), the
Russian president’s visit is not all that different from the usual
visit of a head of state to the capital of a friendly country. We note
the entirely traditional package of events for a trip to the Armenian
capital: a visit to the Tsitsernakaberd memorial complex dedicated to
the genocide of Armenians during the Ottoman Empire, the ceremonial
opening dedication of Russian Square in Yerevan, the signing of
documents on cooperation (which will be inscribed, of course, into the
overall context of a strategic alliance), and a press conference
summarizing the results. However, the situation surrounding the
Russian leader’s visit is far from routine.

We begin with the purely psychological aspects. Dmitriy Medvedev’s
two-day trip to Yerevan marks his first official visit to Armenia as
the Russian head of state. Since the beginning of this year visits to
Armenia have been made by Viktor Zubkov (who was serving as prime
minister at the time) and State Duma Chairman Boris Gryzlov. And
whereas Armenian President Serzh Sarkisyan visited Moscow immediately
following his victory in the presidential election (his visit took
place in late March 2008 and constituted his first foreign trip),
Dmitriy Medvedev’s schedule of trips prior to October did not include
Yerevan. We recall, however, that the Russian Federation president had
already visited Azerbaijan. In the Southern Caucasus, such visits
(like all movement and positive signals towards "the likely strategic
enemy") are perceived with extreme jealousy. Many political figures
and experts in Yerevan have been saying, most often in private, that
the Russian Federation president promised to visit Yerevan as one of
the first on his calendar of visits to CIS capitals. However, his trip
to this country, which Moscow is accustomed to calling a strategic
ally, was only scheduled for October. The Russian head of state
travelled to Baku in early July 2008 within the framework of his
trans-Caspian tour. During the course of this visit, Medvedev made no
secret of his interest in developing bilateral relations with this
Caspian state. "Azerbaijan is our strategic partner in the
Caucasus. We are linked by virtue of an ages-old history and the
special nature of our current partnership, which are helping to
resolve the most diverse problems," Dmitriy Medvedev stated in
Baku. During the course of Medvedev’s July visit, the Declaration on
Friendship and Strategic Partnership between the Russian Federation
and Azerbaijan was signed.

Not everything has been simple in the perception of actions by Yerevan
and Moscow following the events of the "five-day war." Russia has
embarked upon recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia but has done nothing to promote the interests of Nagornyy
Karabakh. Moreover, Moscow continues to pursue a special approach with
respect to the NKR [Nagorno Karabakh Republic]. Nagornyy Karabakh was
not included on the list of de facto states that could be viewed as
examples for application of the "Kosovo precedent." The NKR has not
been mentioned in Duma declarations indicating possible conditions for
official legal recognition. There have not been any particular
presidential or government directives with respect to this republic.
However, all this was prior to the establishment of the precedent for
revision of the inter-republic borders, which became interstate
borders at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union. After 26
August 2008, the distinct dissatisfaction in Yerevan with the
Kremlin’s "special approach" towards the NKR intensified. Naturally,
we are not talking about publicly expressed dissatisfaction. But who
said that the whole of Armenia’s policy is confined to the complex of
government buildings? Or even to Armenian territory proper? The
opposition, the diaspora, and Karabakh are also factors that cannot be
brushed aside. Such sentiment is reinforced by Moscow’s growing
interest in Azerbaijan. A significant role here was played by the
September visit of Azerbaijani President Ilkham Aliyev to Moscow and
by the elections of the head of state that took place 15 October of
this year in the Caspian republic.

In the opinion of a whole host of experts both in Azerbaijan and in
countries of the West, the presidential elections in Azerbaijan have
turned into a competition among politicians in the Russian Federation
and United States for support of the existing authority. Certain
Armenian information agencies view with alarm the commentary and
statements of Russian officials. The Internet publication "ArmeniaNow"
has examined an interview given by Russian Foreign Affairs Minister
Sergey Lavrov to Rossiyskaya Gazeta in which the minister states
specifically: "Armenia has essentially been blockaded as a result of
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Armenia has tremendous difficulty
communicating with the outside world. It is in the fundamental
interest of the Armenian people that this blockade be removed as
rapidly as possible. There are truly very few geographical and
political solutions." In the view of the Internet publication, "Moscow
did not indulge in such a tone when Robert Kocharyan was president."
The Armenian news media have also been greatly distressed by the words
spoken by Aleksey Ostrovskiy, chairman of the State Duma Committee for
the CIS, with respect to the principle of territorial integrity as a
governing principle of international law. And here again we should
focus attention on the asymmetry of perceptions. That which is
considered insignificant commentary in Moscow (aimed at the Western
audience or comprising a kind of diversionary PR designed to
demonstrate a "constructive position") is perceived in Armenia pretty
much as a concise ideological demarche. In this regard, the distinct
warming of relations between Moscow and Baku is causing alarm in
Yerevan (especially as it relates to Karabakh). The convergence of
positions between Ankara and Moscow is a separate topic. But the fears
and phobias here are less foreboding, if only because Yerevan itself
has undertaken measures to draw closer to Turkey. Nonetheless, fears
of "behind-the-scenes games" and "secret diplomacy" (in the manner of
Ataturk and Lenin) are present in Armenia (there being a historical
basis for such thinking).

There is simply a fear in Armenia that the independence of Abkhazia
and South Ossetia will be paid for (or bought – however you want to
look at it) by "handing over" Karabakh. Modest Kolerov, former head of
the Department of CIS Affairs of the president’s administration, notes
quite correctly that you can only hand over that which you actually
have (and Russia does not have control over the NKR, as is the case
with Abkhazia and South Ossetia), but in Armenia (as in any other
republic of the former USSR) people have a tendency to overestimate
Russia’s resources – as they do the geopolitical machinations which
may not be taking place in reality. Under conditions of the absence of
international support for the policy of recognition of the
independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Moscow simply cannot
ignore the Azerbaijan factor and must not facilitate the growth of
anti-Russian phobias there. Otherwise, room for manoeuvre in the
Southern Caucasus, already quite limited, will inevitably become
narrower still.

At the same time, it is also true that the Kremlin does not understand
a certain objective, underlying aspect of Yerevan’s actions. Armenia
has refused to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia and has not entered into conflict with neighbouring
Georgia. At a summit meeting of the ODKB [Collective Security Treaty
Organization] on 5 September 2008, Armenia merely acknowledged the
illegitimacy of Tbilisi’s measures of force against South Ossetia. On
the other hand, republic President Serzh Sarkisyan paid a friendly
visit to Tbilisi on 30 September. The Armenian head of state was
awarded a Georgian decoration and received compliments from the
Georgian leader. It seems that many in Moscow believe that Mikhail
Saakashvili’s words addressed to the Armenian president came as a
knife through the heart. Saakashvili stated literally: "We highly
value the position of the Armenian leadership in connection with its
steadfast support of Georgia’s territorial integrity. Like many
countries, like practically all other countries in the world and those
of the immediate region, Armenia has expressed its unambiguous and
unswerving support for the territorial integrity of Georgia, its
unity, and the peaceful settlement of conflicts. I am convinced that
unity with respect to all these issues will remain forever in the
memory not only of our governments, but also of our peoples."
Naturally, representatives of the domestic opposition are striving in
every possible way to present the extremely complex relationship with
Georgia in the context of a change in Armenia’s foreign policy
(seemingly referring to a reorientation on the West). It is entirely
likely that influential Russians are just as unenthusiastic about
Yerevan’s contacts with the European Union, NATO, and the United
States as they are about Armenia’s constructive relations with
Georgia.

However, despite all the complexities in Russian-Armenian relations,
it should be acknowledged that there is a positive dynamic here as
well. More than 1,000 Russian enterprises are operating today in
Armenia. More than 70 Russian oblasts and republics are engaged in
cooperative effort with Armenia, and the trade volume in the past
several months alone has grown by almost 20 per cent. In the meantime,
we cannot attribute the entire complexity of bilateral ties to the
"Procrustean bed" of economic statistics. It is simply that both
Moscow and Yerevan must be more realistic in their assessment of one
another’s motives and reject heightened expectations (so as to avoid
terrible disappointment). Today we must accept as a given the fact
that Moscow does not recognize the independence of the NKR, and
Yerevan will not recognize the independence of the two former Georgian
autonomies. The Kremlin will not decline to cooperate with Baku and
will not make a definitive choice between the two Transcaucasian
states. But neither will Yerevan reject advantageous cooperation with
the West and with Georgia (across whose territory almost two-thirds of
all of Armenia’s foreign trade passes). Finally, the United States is
actually closing its eyes to Armenia’s cooperation with Iran (but what
else can you do given the complicated political geography?). In this
manner, the overriding mission of Dmitriy Medvedev’s visit could be
the clarification of complex aspects of the relationship, the
disavowal of mutual phobias, fears, suspicions, and misunderstandings.
The entirety of such actions may be classified as a unique kind of
psychological easing of tensions.

Over the 17 years that have transpired since the collapse of the USSR,
both countries have gained a great deal from mutually advantageous
cooperation. The main goal today is to shore up these gains,
discarding unnecessary jealousy and emotion and focusing on the true
motives of each partner – and naturally taking into account the
restrictive factors that objectively exist for both the Russian
Federation and Armenia.

[Description of Source: Moscow Politkom.ru WWW-Text in Russian –
Website created by the independent Political Technologies Center
featuring insightful political commentary that is sometimes critical
of the government; URL:]

[translated]

Behind the myth of ByzantiumSplendour and mysticism abound, but the
Royal Academy’s epic exhibition of Byzantine treasures is touchingly
human

Guardian/UK
Jonathan Jones
Thursday October 30 2008 14.36 GMT

A 7th-century icon originally from Constantinople showing saints
Sergios and Bacchos. Photograph: The Bohdan and Varvara Khanenko Museum
of Arts, Kiev

Byzantium at the Royal Academy, in London, is a mind-expanding
exhibition. It’s the kind of exhibition the Royal Academy has always
done superbly, shatteringly well – the colossal blockbuster that lets
you encounter the treasures of an entire civilisation in one go.

Byzantium 330-1453 Royal Academy, London W1J 0BD Until March 22 2009
Details:
+44(0)870 8488484 £12 (adults) Venue website
Today it gets even richer, for although it opened on Sunday it was only
last night that precious works of art from the Monastery of Mount Sinai
could be installed. I happened to be there recording a Guardian video
about the show (which you can see next Monday) and it was fascinating
to see the black-robed art-expert priests from Mount Sinai mounting
their treasures in the heart of London.

But this exhibition is actually better in some ways than previous RA
marathons. Splendour is controlled by a searching intelligence that
matches recent British Museum extravaganzas. The curators don’t give us
a mere spectacle but a thought-provoking look at the reality of
Byzantium, behind the myth. The classic image of Byzantine art is one
of abstract mysticism and remoteness, but the city that preserved an
evolved version of classical culture for a 1,000 years after the fall
of Rome was also a place where people lived their lives. This show
includes such touching surprises as a child’s hooded garment and tiny
shoes, exhibited among the gold jewellery in a way that wakes you up
and makes you think – blimey, Byzantines were people! They didn’t spend
their entire lives chanting!

There is a wonderful display of icons, and the first thing you notice
in these religious pictures is not the ethereality but the humanity:
faces have a muscular vitality and gazes between Mary and the Angel are
animated and passionate. The brilliant choice of Byzantine paintings
quietly demonstrates how artists in the east shared many of the
emotional nuances of Italian painters by the 14th century.

And of course, there’s copious evidence of the influence of Byzantium.
There are treasures here from San Marco in Venice, whose entire gold
mosaic-covered, multi-domed interior is a vast homage to the eastern
empire. There’s even a tremendous pair of bronze doors made in the east
and exported to Italy. There are illuminated Armenian books, a fresco
from Belgrade and a mosaic from Kiev. It’s an exhibition that starts in
the age of Rome – one of the first things you see is a portrait of the
emperor Constantine – and takes you from there to the Renaissance.

In the early history of Byzantine art you see marvellous ivory carvings
and a page from a 6th-century AD gospel manuscript. Most moving of all
for me was the gigantic face of Christ in an icon painting reminiscent
of the emotional power of the Russian painter Andrei Rublev.

The exhibition is proving popular, with sold-out lectures on issues
like the meaning of the Ascension and the "three genders" of Byzantium
(men, women and eunuchs). I guess it’s further proof that, in art,
militant atheism doesn’t get you very far. People are fascinated by the
supernatural and the unreal and if you eradicated the religious impulse
you might eradicate the artistic one as well. Orthodox Christianity,
anyway, has produced some exquisite expressions of the human spirit.

ATAKHAN: WE SHOULD RATHER DEVELOP OURSELVES AND BRING THE TRUTH ABOUT OUR PROBLEMS

Today.Az
cs/48655.html
Oct 31 2008
Azerbaijan

Oqtay Atakhan: "We should rather develop ourselves and bring the truth
about our problems via our mass medias and communications instead of
blaming some Russian mass medias"

Day.Az interview with leader of the Humanist Party of Azerbaijan
Oqtay Atakhan.

– How would comment on the action of the Russian portal Mail.Ru
against the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan?

– There is nothing surprising about it. Such actions are taken not
only by Russian but also other foreign mass medias, as well as public
and state organizations. We should rather develop ourselves and bring
the truth about our problems via our mass medias and communications
instead of blaming some Russian mass medias.

– You are right. We have repeatedly witnessed that different Russian
companies and news portals challenge the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. What is it connected with?

– It is connected with the fact that all countries, except for two
or three states, in fact do not recognize the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan.

The fact that no one recognizes Armenia as an aggressor country and
perceive it as an equal party in the said conflict, in which we are
bound to make a "compromise", implying that we must admit our guilt
and reject our native lands, proves most things…

Thus, instead of initiation of the second world war and declaration
of war to fascist aggressor, the leading world states could have urged
the occupied France, Poland, Holland and USSR and all others to sit on
the negotiation table with the fascist Germany, which occupied them,
and attain an agreement with it, by no way applying force in response,
which today the world community does not recognize in our case.

If Great Britain and the United states had behaved like that and bound
others to do that, it would be clear that the current political map
of the world would have been different. It means that what is allowed
to super states is prohibited to small countries like Azerbaijan.

– I would call it a tough comparison. But let’s get back to the
assessment of the reasons of separate cases of disrespect towards the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Thus, there is ArmRosgazprom,
which ensures gas supply to Nagorno karabakh. Gazprom owns 67.94%
in the founding capital, the government of Armenia 26.23% and ITERA
5.83%. Does it prove that Gazprom is aware that gas is supplied to
the occupied lands of Azerbaijan?

– The government of Russia which owns Gazprom de facto and de jure and
via it ArmRosgazprom is aware not only of it and everything that is
going on both in Armenia and in Azerbaijan but is a direct ideologist
and initiator of most that is happening in the region.

– Does Gazprom have a significant influence on the external policy
of Russia?

– Gazprom and Lukoil in Russia, as well as BP in Great Britain and
all similar producing companies of other countries, including all
those foreign companies, operating in Azerbaijan, are in fact state
"backs"- the representatives of these countries in the regions and
the countries, where these companies work.

And the most important is that these "backs" in fact unite all
interests and the services of these countries including external
political, external economic, reconnaissance, counter-reconnaissance,
information and propagandist.

– How will Azerbaijan build its further relations with Gazprom
and Russia?

– The same as we build relations with all those foreign companies,
which, unlike Gazprom, in fact own our oil and our gas and most of
other things, we do not think of or mention.

Gazprom has just stated the intention to buy our gas while US companies
along with British and other ones have fully seized control over
our natural resources and what? Don’t they provide direct financial
assistance both to Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh?

The problem lies not with Russia, the United States, Great Britain
and almost all the remaining countries of the world, who do not
care of Azerbaijan and Azerbaijani people. The problem lies with our
improvidence, bribery and constant greediness. If after the death of
the prominent figure of our people Muslim Magomayev it became clear
that most people not only among youth but also among older generation
do not know who he was and are absolutely indifferent to this tragic
event – what can be said about such people?

If we admitted on the state level that about 5,000 elderly people,
women and children were captured only in 2008 15 years after 1993,
which morality, honor and dignity can be spoken of? We have deserved
everything that we have now.

NO POSITIVE SHIFT IN RESPECT OF FIGHTING CORRUPTION IS NOTICED IN ARMENIA, ARMENIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS REPRESENTATIVE CONSIDERS

Noyan Tapan
Oct 31, 2008

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 31, NOYAN TAPAN. The subject of the regular, October
31 discussion held within the framework of the program under the title
Formation and Establishment of Political Culture in Armenia held by the
National Press Club jointly with the U.S. National Democratic Institute
was Corruption in Armenia and Ways of Overcoming It. As Gagik Melikian,
a member of the NA RPA faction, said, corruption was born with the
mankind and will be liquidated with the mankind. According to him,
one can fight to reduce its volumes but not to liquidate it. In
G. Melikian’s opinion, both the current and former authorities have
been implementing various events to reduce corruption in Armenia. In
particular, a group on fighting corruption, a monitoring group have
been formed, rather large amendments have been made in the legislative
sphere. However, the results are not satisfactory yet.

Vachagan Khachatrian, a representative of the Armenian National
Congress, said that no step is undertaken in that direction in Armenia
and no positive shift is noticed. According to him, the evidence of
it is the results of the studies conducted by independent experts,
according to which Armenia is numbered among countries having
a high degree of corruption. In V. Khachatrian’s opinion, proper
conditions need to be created to liquidate corruption in the country,
in particular, democracy need to be established.

According to his estimation, the most corrupted system in Armenia is
the political one, especially in the preelection period.

SAHAKYAN, KASPRZYK DISCUSS SITUATION AT NKR AND AZERI ARMED FORCES CONTACT LINE

PanARMENIAN.Net
27.10.2008 19:28 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ On 27 October, President of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic Bako Sahakyan met in Stepanakert with personal representative
of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk to discuss
the issues related to the current situation at the line of contact
between NKR and Azerbaijan armed forces, the Central information
department of the NKR president’s office told PanARMENIAN.Net.

ARMENIAN Foreign Minister DELIVERS SPEECH IN LONDON’S ROYAL INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

ARMENPRESS
Oct 28, 2008

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 28, ARMENPRESS: Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian visited October 27 London’s International Relations Royal
Institute where he delivered a speech on "Regional Security in the
South Caucasus: Armenian Prospect". Political analysts, diplomats
accredited in London, representatives of state establishments of
Great Britain were present at the event. After the speech Edward
Nalbandian answered to a number of questions connected with Armenia’s
foreign policy.

Armenia’s Foreign Ministry press service told Armenpress that
afterwards Armenian minister visited BBC radio station and gave
interview to its four reporters.

Next meeting of Nalbandian was with the representatives of the British
Armenian community. During the meeting Edward Nalbandian presented
the main directions and priorities of Armenia’s foreign policy,
opportunities of regulation of Karabakh issue, steps carried out
towards the regulation of Armenian-Turkish relations.

Speaking about Homeland-Diaspora relations, minister Nalbandian
said that Armenian authorities are aimed at bringing the level
of cooperation with Diaspora on a new quality and the creation of
Diaspora Ministry was aimed at it.

Edward Nalbandian also met with the special representative of United
Kingdom’s government in the South Caucasus Bryan Foll and discussed
with him the steps undertaken for boosting bilateral relations,
recent regional developments and prospects of regulation of conflicts.

Ending his London visit the minister arrived back today in Yerevan.

THE PRICES OF FUEL DROP

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
28 Oct 2008
Armenia

In parallel with the drop of the prices of fuel in the international
market, the prices of petrol and diesel fuel continues to drop in
Armenian markets as well. As of yesterday the prices dropped by
20 dram.

At the moment "regular" petrol is sold by 340 drams in the two big
companies importing petrol – "Petrol Service" and "Flesh".

The same goes with the price of the diesel fuel – 340 drams a liter.

"Petrol Service" and "Flesh" companies have reduced the price of
"premium" petrol by 20 drams. But as usual in the gas-filling stations
belonging to "Petrol Service" it is cheaper (360 drams a liter)
than in the ones belonging to "Flesh" (370 drams a liter).

ERNST&YOUNG INTRODUCES NEW OFFICE IN ARMENIA

ARKA
oct 29, 2008

YEREVAN, October 29. /ARKA/. Ernst & Young, a leading international
auditing service operating in Armenia for a decade now, announced
its new location in Yerevan, a representative of the company told
ARKA News Agency today.

According to Karl Johansson, the Ernst & Young CIS Managing Partner,
the increasingly growing Armenian market and, in particular, its close
ties with the countries of Europe, Middle East, Africa and India,
contributed to the decision to expand the activities of the company
in Armenia.

Johansson noted that the clients of the company that operate in
Armenian market, have leading positions in their fields and have a
major influence on Armenia’s economy. He stressed Ernst & Young’s
presence in Armenia will play a part in the economic and business
development of the country, as Armenia shows dynamic economic growth
and many companies are increasingly facing the challenges. The company
is ready to assist Armenia’s expanding business community in a wide
range of services and its international experience.

Hakob Sarkissian, the Head of CIS Transaction Advisory Services,
stated the company will operate in Armenia using its experience in
Europe, Middle East, Africa and India.

"We already have 15 specialists in Yerevan, many of whom have been
trained in our Moscow office," he said.

Ernst & Young is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction
and advisory services. Worldwide, its 135,000 workers provide a
comprehensive auditing and consulting services.

Ernst & Young experts have assisted CIS companies in attracting a
total of $27,8bln worth capital during IPO.