EU-Armenia Partnership Council to be held in Brussels

Panorama, Armenia

Dec 17 2020

The EU-Armenia partnership will start in Brussels on Thursday. The meeting will be chaired by Josep Borrell, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the press service at the European Commission reported. 

Participants will first discuss, in a plenary session, EU-Armenia relations, including matters related to political dialogue and reform, democracy, rule of law and human rights. The discussion will focus in particular on the implementation of the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) and the Partnership’s priorities.

Participants will also talk about economic, trade and sectoral cooperation, as well as other issues pertaining to EU-Armenia relations and issues connected to the EU neighbourhood.

Participants will then, in a restricted session, exchange views on the situation in and around Nagorno-Karabakh following the cessation of hostilities on 10 November 2020 and the EU’s role in supporting recovery and reconciliation regional issues. 



Armenian PM receives OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs

Save

Share

 17:02,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 14, ARMENPRESS. Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan received on December 14 OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs Stéphane Visconti of France, Andrew Schofer of the United States of America, Charge d’Affaires of the Russian Federation in Armenia Aleksey Sinegubov, and Andrzej Kasprzyk, the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, the PM’s Office told Armenpress.

Pashinyan attached importance to the visit of the Co-Chairs to the region following the war unleashed by Azerbaijan against Nagorno Karabakh. He highlighted the necessity of resumption of negotiations under the Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship format for the comprehensive settlement of the NK conflict. As a priority the Armenian PM stressed the need for clarification of the status of Artsakh, taking into account the importance of the principle of the exercise of the Artsakh people’s right to self-determination, the de-occupation of the territories of Artsakh captured by Azerbaijan, the creation of conditions for the safe return of Artsakh-Armenians to their settlements, as well as the preservation of religious and cultural heritage.

Pashinyan also condemned Azerbaijan’s violation of the commitments assumed by the November 9 trilateral statement, which was demonstrated by provocative actions in the line of contact with Artsakh on December 11 and 12.

During the meeting issues relating to the post-war situation, the resumption of the negotiation process, the restoration of the rights of Artsakh-Armenians and their security were discussed.

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

Azerbaijan announces military deaths in Karabakh despite peace accord

Macau Business
Dec 13 2020

Azerbaijan announced on Sunday that four of its troops had been killed in the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region since a peace deal with Armenian separatists was agreed in early November.

The defence ministry said a group of Armenian fighters remained in the mountainous province — breaking the terms of the Russian-brokered truce — and had recently launched fatal attacks on Azerbaijan’s forces.

The ministry said three servicemen were killed in a separatist ambush on November 26 and another sustained fatal injuries during an attack near the village of Hadrut on Tuesday last week.

Both Armenia and Azerbaijan accused each other breaching the truce that ended six weeks of fighting between the longstanding foes for control of the breakaway region.

Armenia said on Sunday that six separatist fighters were injured in clashes with Azerbaijan troops after skirmishes broke out on Friday evening.

The Armenian defence ministry reported hours of fighting near Hadrut on Saturday, including with heavy artillery, claiming Azerbaijan had bolstered its military presence in the area.

“The Armenian side has six wounded,” the ministry said, describing the incident as an Azerbaijani “provocation”.

The defence ministry said the new fighting was discussed during a meeting in Moscow between Russian and Armenian defence ministers, while the foreign ministry said clashes continued into Sunday.

Azerbaijan said Sunday it had been forced to respond to recent fatal attacks on its servicemen by conducting anti-terror operations. 

The six-week conflict that erupted in September between the separatists backed by Armenia and Azerbaijan over the mountainous region ended November 10 with a Moscow-brokered peace deal that saw the Armenians cede swathes of territory.

More than 5,000 people including civilians were killed during the fighting between the ex-Soviet rivals, who fought a war in the 1990s over the mountainous region.

Russia has deployed nearly 2,000 peacekeeping troops to Nagorno-Karabakh as part of the peace deal and the Russian defence ministry Saturday reported that the truce had been violated.

It was Russia’s first report of a violation since the peace deal was introduced.

The French and US heads of the Minsk Group, which led talks on the conflict for decades but failed to achieve a lasting agreement, met Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev in Baku on Saturday.

Aliyev described reports of new fighting as “troubling” and vowed to use an “iron fist” to “crush” Armenian forces completely if fighting erupts again.

Minsk Group envoys Stephane Visconti and Andrew Schofer were expected in Armenia’s capital Yerevan on Sunday.

On a visit to Baku this week, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hailed what he called his close ally’s “glorious victory” in the conflict.

The Turkish leader, who attended celebrations marking Azerbaijan’s success, has overtly supported Baku, helping to train and arm its military.

Azerbaijani forces attempt attack in southern direction of Artsakh Defense Army

Save

Share

 11:24,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 12, ARMENPRESS. The Defense Army of Artsakh denies the Azerbaijani media reports according to which the Armenian forces launched an armed provocation in the Hadrut section as a result of which an Azerbaijani servicemen has been wounded.

“The truth is that on December 11, at around 20:40, the Azerbaijani side launched an attack attempt in the direction of one of the military positions located in the southern direction of the Defense Army. Three reservists have received gunshot wounds of various degrees as a result of exchange of fire. Their lives are not under danger. Investigation is underway to clarify the details of the incident”, the Artsakh Defense Army said in a statement.

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

AP: Protesters in Armenia besiege parliament, demand prime minister resigns

Dec 9 2020
Protesters in Armenia besiege parliament, demand prime minister resigns

Thousands of protesters converged on the parliament building in Yerevan, Armenia, on Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2020, to push for the resignation of the ex-Soviet nation’s prime minister for his handling of the fighting with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.

HRANT KHACHATRYAN/PAN /AP

By ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: December 9, 2020

YEREVAN, Armenia — Thousands of protesters converged on the parliament building in Armenia’s capital Wednesday to push for the resignation of the ex-Soviet nation’s prime minister over his handling of the fighting with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Nikol Pashinyan’s opponents are angry at a peace deal that ended six weeks of fighting over the separatist region but saw Azerbaijan take over wide areas that have been controlled by Armenian forces for more than a quarter-century.

Armenia’s opposition parties gave Pashinyan an ultimatum to resign by Tuesday, but he has ignored the demand, defending the peace deal as a bitter but necessary move that prevented Azerbaijan from overrunning the entire Nagorno-Karabakh region.

About 15,000 protesters marched through downtown Yerevan to the parliament building, chanting “Nikol go away!”

The opposition has been pushing for Pashinyan’s resignation since the Russia-brokered peace deal took effect on Nov. 10. Protests have grown over the past days, with demonstrators blocking traffic in various sections of the capital, and also rallying in other cities.

The Armenian Apostolic Church and all three of the country’s former presidents have joined the demand for Pashinyan to step down.

Undeterred, the prime minister told lawmakers in parliament Wednesday that the nation needs consolidation in the current difficult period. “Voices of different groups mustn’t be mistaken for the people’s voice,” he said.

Speaking outside parliament Wednesday, Artur Vanetsyan, the former head of the National Security Service who leads the Homeland opposition party, argued that Pashinyan should step down to allow opposition forces to “normalize the situation” in the country. “Each day he stays on the job raises a new threat to the nation,” Vanetsyan said.

Nagorno-Karabakh lies within Azerbaijan but has been under the control of ethnic Armenian forces backed by Armenia since a separatist war there ended in 1994. That war left Nagorno-Karabakh itself and substantial surrounding territory in Armenian hands.

In 44 days of fighting that began in late September and left more than 5,600 people killed on both sides, the Azerbaijani army forged deep into Nagorno-Karabakh, forcing Armenia to accept the peace deal that saw Azerbaijan reclaim much of the separatist region along with surrounding areas.

Azerbaijanis have celebrated it as a major victory, and the country is set to hold a massive military parade Thursday — to be attended by visiting Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey strongly backed Azerbaijan during the conflict, which it used to expand its clout in the region.

___

Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow contributed to this report.


TURKISH press: Best road map for post-Karabakh war process

An Azerbaijani soldier stands guard at a checkpoint on a road entering Fuzuli province, Azerbaijan, Dec. 2, 2020. (AFP Photo)

The second Karabakh war is over, and peace has come. But peace is not just an absence of war; it also should involve a settlement that makes future war no longer necessary or desirable. In the search for a functional settlement in Karabakh, it might be worth examining the political structures which were established in Northern Ireland in 1998 to accommodate diverse interests and make reconciliation possible between two divided communities.

After a 28-year conflict in the north of Ireland, a peace agreement was signed, known as the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. Despite some difficult moments, it has stood the test of time. There are a number of elements within it that might be appropriate to apply to the Karabakh conflict to assist the development of long-term peace and stability.

What we have in Karabakh, like in Northern Ireland, is a conflict between two nationalities. Finding an accommodation between what are effectively two nations sharing the same territory involves discovering a way these historic peoples can share this land in peaceful coexistence. The previous Armenian regime attempted to solve the nationalities issue by removing one of them entirely. It failed, and nothing of the sort should be attempted again.

For the next five years, at least, the Armenian population of two-thirds of the former Nagorno-Karabakh will be isolated from their Azerbaijani neighbors. It would be very unfortunate if they remain a ringed-off homogeneous enclave within the Azerbaijani state, guarded by Russian forces. That would maintain a “siege mentality” which would certainly not be conducive to the building of future good relations between the two peoples of Karabakh, or between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The lessons of Northern Ireland suggest there needs to be development of mutual trust and interest within Karabakh itself, as well as between Armenia and Azerbaijan to address the totality of relations in the conflict. So how can this be done?

The settlement in the north of Ireland was built from strands that addressed all the crucial relationships. First, there was an internal arrangement that involved the establishment of an inclusive power-sharing government with powers over local aspects like the economy, education, health, agriculture, infrastructure and policing. This government was a mandatory coalition including ministers from each community and headed by two joint first ministers. Applied to Karabakh, this would provide for a cabinet made up of equal numbers of Armenians and Azerbaijanis, sharing executive authority.

A local legislative assembly made of representatives from both communities, elected on a proportional basis, also makes up the consociational structures in Northern Ireland which could be a model for Karabakh. This would facilitate power-sharing in which the two peoples are required to engage with one another on an equal basis, with veto power safeguards provided to each in legislative affairs, to protect the rights and interests of all. Statutory measures to ensure cultural and economic equality would be an important aspect of this.

A question will undoubtedly emerge about what the size and population composition of a new Karabakh might be. It should not be the territory of the old Soviet-imposed Nagorno-Karabakh. It would be better to form an autonomous region out of a roughly equal populace of Armenians and Azerbaijanis sharing the same local issues. That removes a potential minority problem faced by one of the communities.

Policing and justice acceptable to both peoples could be provided, as in Northern Ireland, through 50/50 recruitment to a local police force. It would have a distinct uniform and be unarmed. The decommissioning of all private arms would be insisted upon and carried out by the peacekeeping forces. Only state forces and any remaining peacekeepers would carry weapons.

As in the Good Friday Agreement, the wider relationship between Armenia and Azerbaijan could be provided for through an intergovernmental council in which the respective foreign and other relevant ministers would work together, consulting and cooperating in the mutual interest.

Issues like regional energy security, the development of infrastructure projects, economic resources and tourism would be discussed and collaborated on. The aim would be to build on the development of the totality of relationships between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in a harmonious and mutually beneficial way. It might even be desirable to establish an adjunct to such a council involving representation from Georgia to build a wider governmental structure for the region on the lines of the old Transcaucasian model.

This process would be important for Armenia, in particular. Due to the occupation, Armenia has been isolated from the rest of the region for three decades. Azerbaijan already has gained the benefits of being a corridor of east-west and north-south trade and transport links. Armenia could now be integrated into the wider economic sphere, as well as the energy supply routes that have, of necessity, bypassed the country which helped develop Azerbaijan into a prosperous country. Armenia, given a new dispensation, could develop in such a way that its population increases and its large number of migrant workers return home to their families.

All these relations, at executive and legislative levels, internally and regionally, would help build good relations and interdependence among peoples and states formerly in conflict. Confidence in each other would develop, and barriers and stereotypes would be broken down. The dissensions of the past could be replaced by the development of fraternal relations in the longer term.

In the short term, the supervisory powers of Russia and Turkey would have a vital role to play. These powers, working closely together, would provide for regional security and stability. All would be locked into a common purpose for the betterment of all. The potential of this vital geostrategic region at the heart of Eurasia could be fulfilled, bringing about the reconstruction of Karabakh and the enrichment of its people.

There will, of course, be problems on the road to peace and reconciliation, some of which may threaten the very existence of such a project. However, an imperfect peace will always be preferable to the most perfect war.

*Irish historian, political analyst, author of “Great Britain against Russia in the Caucasus: Ottoman Turks, Armenians and Azerbaijanis caught up in geopolitics, war and revolution”

RFE/RL Armenian Report – 12/02/2020

                                        Wednesday, 
Armenian Prosecutors Consider First Asset Seizures
        • Naira Bulghadarian
Armenia -- Srbouhi Galian speaks to RFE/RL, April 15, 2020.
Armenian prosecutors have started scrutinizing assets of more than 200 people to 
determine whether they were acquired illegally and can be confiscated under a 
controversial law enacted earlier this year.
The law drafted by the Armenian government allows the prosecutors to conduct 
such inquiries in case of having “sufficient grounds to suspect” that the market 
value of an individual’s assets exceeds their “legal income” by at least 50 
million drams ($100,000). Should the prosecutors find such discrepancies they 
can ask courts to nationalize them even if their owners are not found guilty of 
corruption or other criminal offenses.
The latter will have to prove the legality of their holdings if they are to 
retain them. They will also be given the option of reaching an out-of-court 
settlement with the authorities, which would require them to hand over at least 
75 percent of their assets in and outside Armenia to the state.
The politically sensitive process is handled by a special team of prosecutors 
formed in September and overseen by Deputy Prosecutor-General Srbuhi Galian.
Galian told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service on Wednesday that the team is now 
investigating 206 people suspected of having enriched themselves illegally. She 
declined to name any of them or say whether there are well-known individuals 
among them.
“I hope that the public will hear in the near future about the practical 
application of this legal instrument,” said the 28-year-old official.
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian has repeatedly portrayed the law as a major 
anti-corruption measure that will help his administration recover “wealth stolen 
from the people.” Pashinian has indicated his intention to use it against the 
country’s former rulers and their cronies.
Opposition groups and figures, among them supporters of former President Serzh 
Sarkisian, have condemned the law as unconstitutional and accused Pashinian of 
planning a far-reaching “redistribution of assets” to cement his hold on power.
Final decisions on asset forfeiture are due to be made by special 
anti-corruption courts which the Armenian authorities plan to set up soon. The 
government has already drafted a bill on such courts. It is not yet clear when 
it will be debated by the National Assembly.
Armenian Government Eases Martial Law
Armenia -- Riot police detain an opposition protester in Yerevan, December 1, 
2020.
Armenia’s government lifted on Wednesday serious restrictions on civil liberties 
stemming from martial law declared by it following the outbreak of the 
Nagorno-Karabakh war on September 27.
Martial law allowed the government to not only call a nationwide mobilization of 
army reservists but also ban rallies, strikes and media reports critical of its 
war-related decisions. Citing the mobilization, it also prohibited men under the 
age of 55 from leaving the country without permission granted by military 
authorities.
The government announced the lifting of these bans in a decision posted on its 
website. The chief of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s staff also issued a 
separate statement to that effect.
The move came one week after the pro-government majority in the Armenian 
parliament rejected opposition demands to lift martial law altogether.
The two opposition parties represented in the National Assembly said the 
restrictions are no longer necessary after a Russian-brokered ceasefire that 
stopped the bloody war on November 10.
Government officials and parliament majority leaders countered that martial law 
is still needed for the ongoing redeployment of Armenian army units along 
Armenia’s border with four districts west of Karabakh handed over to Azerbaijan 
as a result of the war and the truce agreement.
They said the Defense Ministry has drafted legislation allowing it to call up 
army reservists without martial law. The government, they said, needs time to 
examine and approve the ministry proposals.
Opposition lawmakers claimed that the authorities are keeping the restrictions 
in place to stifle street protests against the truce accord that locked in 
Azerbaijan’s sweeping territorial gains. They also argued that martial law does 
not allow parliamentary motions of no confidence in Pashinian and his cabinet.
Putin Backs Pashinian Over Karabakh Truce Implementation
        • Aza Babayan
RUSSIA -- Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses a summit of the Collective 
Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) via a video link at the Novo-Ogaryovo state 
residence outside Moscow, December 2, 2020.
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday praised Prime Minister Nikol 
Pashinian for agreeing to the “painful” ceasefire in Nagorno-Karabakh and said 
Russia and its ex-Soviet allies should help him implement the 
Armenian-Azerbaijani agreement brokered by Moscow.
“Armenia and the Armenian people have endured a really difficult period in their 
history,” Putin said during a virtual summit of the Russian-led Collective 
Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). “The leadership of Armenia, the prime 
minister had to take very hard but necessary, for the Armenian people, decisions.
“I must say that those decisions were painful but, I repeat, necessary, and 
their adoption required the Armenian prime minister’s personal courage. This is 
obvious, and each of us participating in this meeting understands the extent of 
responsibility needed for making such decisions. He [Pashinian] took that 
responsibility.”
“And our task now is to support both the prime minister and his team in order to 
establish a peaceful life, ensure the implementation of all adopted decisions 
and help people [in the Karabakh conflict zone] who have found themselves in a 
difficult situation,” added Putin.
The remarks came amid continuing calls for Pashinian’s resignation voiced by 
Armenian opposition leaders and a growing number of public figures. They hold 
him responsible for sweeping territorial gains made by Azerbaijan during the war 
and locked in by the ceasefire agreement.
Armenia - Opposition parties hold an anti-government rally in Liberty Square, 
Yerevan, November 18, 2020.
The announcement of the agreement on November 10 provoked a series of 
anti-government demonstrations in Yerevan. Opposition groups plan to resume them 
on Saturday.
Pashinian’s critics were further infuriated by Putin’s November 16 assertion 
that the Armenian side would have suffered fewer territorial losses and, in 
particular, retained control of the strategic Karabakh town of Shushi (Shusha) 
had Pashinian agreed to Azerbaijan’s terms of a ceasefire on October 20.
Pashinian has rejected the opposition demands for his resignation and snap 
parliamentary elections. He has pledged to “restore stability” in Armenia in the 
months ahead.
Addressing the CSTO summit from Yerevan, Pashinian again thanked Putin for 
helping to stop the war with Azerbaijan and deploying Russian peacekeepers in 
Karabakh. He also complained about the slow pace of the exchange of Armenian and 
Azerbaijani prisoners of war and mutual handover of bodies of soldiers killed in 
action.
Authorities Implicate Opposition Groups In Yerevan Riots
Armenia - Angry protesters break into the prime minister's office, Yerevan, 
November 10, 2020.
The National Security Service (NSS) on Wednesday accused Armenian opposition 
members and supporters of organizing violent protests in Yerevan following the 
announcement of the Russian-brokered ceasefire in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Hundreds of angry men broke into Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s office and 
residence and the Armenian parliament and ransacked them early on November 10. 
They condemned the ceasefire agreement as a sellout.
Some of the protesters also beat up parliament speaker Ararat Mirzoyan. The 
latter underwent several surgeries as a result.
In a statement, the NSS said it has indicted about 50 people and arrested 18 of 
them in a continuing criminal investigation into what it described as “mass 
disturbances” aimed at facilitating a violent overthrow of the Armenian 
government.
The statement claimed that the participants of the riots were recruited by 
“supporters of political forces acting in the opposition field and having 
anti-government views.” Many of the rioters support former Presidents Robert 
Kocharian and Serzh Sarkisian or are affiliated with the Armenian Revolutionary 
Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) and other opposition groups, it said.
The security service added that it is now taking “large-scale investigative 
measures” to ascertain “the role of the organizers of the mass disturbances” and 
identify more people involved in the violence. It did not say whether it has 
already brought relevant criminal charges against any opposition politicians.
A senior Dashnaktsutyun member, Bagrat Yesayan, said he has been questioned as a 
witness in the case but not charged by NSS investigators. He said the NSS is now 
trying to falsely implicate him in the violence.
Yesayan accused the Armenian authorities of trying to link the riots to peaceful 
protests against Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian launched by Dashnaktsutyun and 
over a dozen other opposition forces on November 10.
The opposition forces hold Pashinian responsible for the outcome of the war and 
want him to resign. The prime minister has rejected their demands.
Kocharian’s office was also quick to react to the NSS allegations.
“It is widely known that President Kocharian has thousands of supporters who are 
patriotic and politically active people and always take part in various 
demonstrations and protest actions,” the office said in a statement. “The NSS’s 
functions and capacity are needed for another task: clarifying the motives of 
treasonous capitulators.”
Pashinian discussed the NSS probe on Monday at a meeting with the heads of 
Armenian law-enforcement bodies, senior judges and other officials. He seemed 
upset with Armenian courts’ refusal to sanction the pre-trial arrest of many of 
the individuals accused of involvement in the November 10 violence.
Opposition figures and other critics of the Armenian government accused 
Pashinian of pressuring the judiciary. Armenia’s human rights ombudsman, Arman 
Tatoyan, also expressed serious concern over the meeting.
Reprinted on ANN/Armenian News with permission from RFE/RL
Copyright (c) 2020 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc.
1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.
 

The Unthinkable

December 1,  2020



The author’s Iranian passport

In the kitchenette of our hotel room, I prepared a little something for my daughter to eat and, after playing with her for a while, I returned to bed and left her to play. At that early hour there was nothing on TV, so I turned on the radio to hear some music. What I heard was a total shock…

The news was from Tehran; a mob had defied the existing curfew. A reporter said that overnight masses of people had gone into the streets, dressed in long, white robes. They were in defiance of the existing martial law and chanting slogans against the monarchy.

“Down with the Shah,” they shouted. “Azadi, Istiglal, Jomhuri-ye Eslami,” which means Independence, Freedom and an Islamic Republic.

In Islamic tradition, the dead are wrapped in white shrouds before they are buried, so wearing those long, white robes symbolized the protestors’ willingness to be martyred.

The author’s passport

I could hardly believe my ears. I was stunned to hear so much detailed news on the radio. I realized there must be a very serious problem back home.

I cautiously stirred my husband and with a calm voice I said, “Please wake up. Come listen to the radio. He quipped, “I’m too tired. Not now.”

My voice quivered. Holding back emotions, I said, “Havaah passé,” which in colloquial Farsi means the situation is out of control. I continued, “The news on the radio says that a mob has defied the curfew in Tehran and has taken to the streets.”

He bolted up… Now both of us sat on the edge of the bed, listening to the radio and looking at each other in dismay. We were deeply distressed by the news. As I glanced at my daughter playing on the floor, I had no idea yet that we would never return to our home. My heart pounded in my chest. I can still feel the desolation and the fear that settled in. It was an out of body experience.

The situation in Iran had literally changed overnight. My husband called his parents who told us we should extend our stay in London because the civil unrest continued to worsen minute by minute.

Let me step back a little and tell you that many years later I learned that the BBC radio (British Broadcasting Corporation) had helped the Ayatollah Khomeini to gain power by giving him Persian-language broadcasts. The BBC had been called a loudspeaker for Khomeini, providing him with a platform to launch the Islamic Revolution. On that day, I had no idea about that arrangement.

In our comfortable life in Iran, we didn’t have a clue and couldn’t imagine that the Shah and his family would be forced to leave the country. My family and the people we knew didn’t have anything against the Shah. We thought he was a decent ruler. We lived a good and carefree life. Oil money, the “petro-dollars,” as they said, gushed into the country and trickled down to every home. Iran seemed to be in an upward swing, gaining respect on the international stage. We vacationed in Europe, drove luxury cars and wore designer clothing. We spent summers by the pool or the Caspian Sea. We had a wonderful life, and we considered the Shah a friend.

As an ethnic group Armenians had thrived in a Muslim country for over 500 years. We had lived peacefully under the succession of Persian rulers. We enjoyed religious freedom and, by having our own schools, kept our language and culture. No caste system, no roadblocks or prejudice impeded us. We enjoyed social mobility with plenty of opportunities.

Growing up I had heard a story about a distant uncle, named Qazar, who was a communist. His brother owned a printing shop where, without his brother’s knowledge, Uncle Qazar had printed literature about their group’s communist activities — it was around 1936 or 38. At the time, there were only one or two printing shops in Tehran, so it was not difficult for the authorities to find out where the flyers came from. The Shah’s men came and closed the shop, cutting off the brother’s livelihood, and imprisoned the communist uncle for a few years. While in prison, Uncle Qazar studied English literature. He already was well-versed in the Russian, Armenian and Farsi languages; when he got out of prison, he became one of the most prolific translators in Iran. Uncle Qazar translated Anna Karenina from Russian and had his hand in many other translations and in the making of dictionaries. Ironically, one of his nephews became a Minister of Urban Planning in Iran and another nephew was a journalist working at the American Embassy in Tehran.

Growing up, within my six degrees of separation, I had never heard of someone being tortured, whipped or hanged. On the contrary, it was the Islamic Revolution that brought all of that to the foreground for those I knew in Iran.

Opposition to the Shah was nothing new – it was part of the fabric of our society. When the riots got more frequent, we thought the agitation would fade away as it always did. Nobody believed the government would not be able to handle the situation, and that we would end up with a revolution.

Now allow me to take you 25 days before our departure, to Sunday November 5, when the most violent riot broke out. The day came to be called “Black Sunday.” On that Sunday, the opposition gathered momentum and the unrest spread throughout Tehran. Mobs burned, looted and vandalized cinemas, banks and public buildings.

On that day we had gathered at my parents’ home at the outskirts of the city for a late lunch, as we did every Sunday. (Sunday is not a “weekend” in Iran but a regular workday.) A few hours earlier, when I left home around noon to pick up my young daughter from her nursery school, I didn’t notice anything unusual in the streets of Tehran. However, by the time I arrived at my parents’ home, the news announced that thousands of people had taken to the streets demanding the Shah to step down from power.

Although my parents resided away from the center of the city, in the distance we could see the sky turning black with fires set by protestors. Black Sunday marked a turning point in the history of Iran. It was the beginning of the end for the Shah. For us, it was a surprise.

That day, we realized the implications of what was happening around us. We had witnessed a few previews of opposition to the Shah, however, the big picture still looked to be in favor of the status quo.

Our anxiety was high, but even then, we didn’t realize that we were on the cusp of a revolution. The evening of “Black Sunday,” martial law was imposed and, in an effort to stave off disaster, the Shah addressed the nation. I can still remember his words coming from the car radio.

“I, too, have heard the voice of your revolution,” the Shah proclaimed. sounding contrite. “As the Shah of Iran and as an Iranian, I will support the revolution of my people. I promise that the previous mistakes, unlawful acts and injustice will not be repeated.”

He wanted to find a way to dialogue with people and work out a solution, but it was too late. The king was checkmated. The West, including America, wanted the Shah to leave and to hand the country over to Ayatollah Khomeini and the religious fanatics.

How had the Shah, who was such an important ally to the West, suddenly become so unpopular? In those days we looked to the Shah as a tower of strength in the Middle East. He had created a strong economic growth. He had established great relationships with both East and West, and he was in the process of modernizing and Westernizing Iran. And he had many more dreams to implement for the betterment of the country. Why? Why did he have to leave his job unfinished? I think fate was unkind to him.

Queen Farah Pahlavi in her biography, “An Enduring Love,” writes: “Western journalists, who were so punctilious about respecting freedoms, seemed to see Ayatollah Khomeini as the incarnation of the spiritual…” Yes, it was the West who stood shoulder to shoulder with Khomeini to bring about the Islamic Revolution. Even President Reagan later said, “What we did to the Shah is a black page in American history.”

I can’t recall much between Black Sunday and the day we left for London. How exactly did we go on with our daily routines? What was in our thoughts? Did we send our daughter to her nursery school? I wonder how such an important period of time has escaped my memory.

However, I do recall the celebration of my husband’s 30th birthday on November 15, ten days after the riot. We had over 40 guests, but they dispersed early because of the curfew. Otherwise, it was like any other party – a good spread of food, drinks and dancing to European music. At the party there was a lot of talk about the riots and the general unrest in the country, however the consensus was that things would return to normal. We were blindsided.

A few factors prompted our trip to London. First, it was the imposed government curfew. Second, we were heading into the Muslim mourning month of Muharram, during which there was no regular TV programs or music. We felt that the coming weeks would be cheerless and gloomy, and we also thought: “We could spend Christmas in London and return to Tehran when Muharram was over and everything had settled down.” We held active passports and visas, which made it easy for us to travel on the spur of the moment.

I remember I was standing in our bedroom when my husband called to tell me that he had secured tickets for London. He said, “I’ve got three airplane tickets. We’re going to London in two days. Start packing.”

When I hung up, after that short call, I didn’t know what to do, so I called my mother-in-law. “We’re leaving for London in two days!” I said those words, almost panicking. My mind filled with everything I needed to do to get ready.

“Oh, do you want me to come and help you pack?” she asked. “Yes, I do!” I said, relieved.

As I was packing, I was overwhelmed by a strange feeling. I sensed that this departure was different from all others. I kept asking myself, “Should I empty the refrigerator, should I take a few pieces of jewelry with me?” I was at a loss. In the end, we left carrying only two suitcases, thinking we would return in a month. We never did.

Catherine Yesayan is a regular contributor to Asbarez, with her columns appearing under the “Community Links”  heading. She can be reached at .



http://asbarez.com/198873/the-unthinkable/?fbclid=IwAR3RtlAdq9k3asVYRbWG8IF4ClcDC6uzdHZF_frs3RHu-tWJns1wqCfOUuw

My Step Charity Foundation announces urgent support programs for people of Artsakh

Save

Share

 12:20, 1 December, 2020

YEREVAN, DECEBER 1, ARMENPRESS. The My Step Charity Foundation has announced a number of programs in support of the people of Artsakh who were affected by the war.

The foundation said it would provide:

  1. support to the humanitarian aid stations operating in Armenia
  2. packages (bags, stationeries, etc.) to school-aged residents of Artsakh who have temporarily settled in Armenia
  3. acquisition of necessary items (strollers, clothing, hygiene products) for pregnant women and newborns from Artsakh who have temporarily settled in Armenia
  4. organization of a New Year and Christmas market for children in Stepanakert
  5. organization of New Year celebrations for children of military servicemen in Yerevan and in provinces of Armenia
  6. opening of a temporary free meal center in Stepanakert

The foundation said that all relief programs are developed in cooperation with government bodies of Armenia and Artsakh upon studying the needs and demands.

In addition to urgent support programs, the foundation said it is also developing long-term self-sustainable programs which will bring positive change and improvement of livelihood.

“By uniting our efforts, let’s convey our love and care to our countrymen: ”, it said.

Editing and Translating by Stepan Kocharyan

Armenia, Azerbaijan specify locations of temporary military outposts – MFA

Public Radio of Armenia
Nov 27 2020

On November 27 the armed forces of Armenia and Azerbaijan specified the locations of the factual deployment of temporary military outposts to carry out combat duty, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said.

“Demarcation and delimitation of the state border are complex processes, which are carried out by joint interdepartmental commissions and working groups formed between the states through interstate negotiations, as a result of which a relevant international document is signed,” the Foreign Ministry said.