SYDNEY’S SARDARAPAT RADIO BROADCAST OF PROGRAMS CHANGES
NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY
AUGUST 6 2009
SYDNEY
The schedule of programs of Sydney’s Sardarapat radio broadcast
has been changed. According to the information from Australia, the
programs of the Armenian broadcast will be available at 20:00 -22:00,
each Sunday, starting from August 2.
ARE ARMENIA’S POLICIES MAKING TURKEY STRONGER?
Panorama.am
17:56 05/08/2009
The Armenian Foreign Ministry, in all likelihood, has a comprehensive
strategic plan regarding Armenia’s relations with its immediate
neighbors (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Turkey), with major powers
near and far (China, France, Great Britain, Russia, United States),
and with other key states around the world.
At the most basic level, Armenia’s leaders are expected to maximize
their country’s national interests and counter all anti-Armenian
efforts. Based on this simple criterion, I would like to make an
assessment of several critical issues related to Turkey, Armenia’s
most problematic neighbor.
Turkey has not only committed genocide against the Armenian nation and
continues to enjoy the fruits of that crime, it also spends millions
of dollars every year to deny the facts of history and defame the
Armenian people.
Ever since its inception, the Turkish Republic has consistently pursued
the anti-Armenian policies of its Ottoman predecessors. Turkey has
blockaded Armenia since 1993 — an act of war — in order to force
it to make territorial concessions on Artsakh (Karabagh). Shortly
after Armenia’s independence, Turkish, on at least one occasion,
amassed troops on the border, threatening to attack Armenia. Moreover,
Turkey has trained and armed Azerbaijan’s military to enable it to
invade Artsakh and exterminate its ethnic Armenian population.
Turkey also carries out anti-Armenian activities through various
diplomatic channels. Turkish delegates regularly join their Azeri
colleagues in casting votes against Armenia and Artsakh in the Council
of Europe, the United Nations, and the Conference of Islamic States.
Finally, Turkey continues to hold hostage its Armenian population,
depriving it of the most basic cultural, educational and religious
rights.
Under these circumstances, it is incumbent upon Armenian officials
to carefully weigh whether the decisions they take regarding Turkey
inadvertently contribute to their hostile neighbor’s political and
economic strength.
Here are a few examples of such decisions:
Armenia should not accept any preconditions for negotiations with
Turkey on the opening of the border and should not have agreed to
make a joint announcement on the eve of April 24 which helped boost
Turkey’s prestige and undermined efforts to acknowledge the Armenian
Genocide by the United States and others.
Armenia should not recognize Turkey’s present boundaries and should
reject treaties signed by Soviet Armenia, in order not to preclude
future Armenian territorial claims.
Armenia should not agree to the Turkish demand of forming a joint
historical commission to review the facts of the Armenian Genocide,
in order to avoid the questioning of the veracity of the genocide
and not to harm the chances of its acknowledgment by third parties.
Armenia should not allow Turkey to stick its nose in the
Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations over Artsakh, in order not to help
boost Turkey’s image as a credible mediator in Afghanistan, Iran,
Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Syria.
Armenia’s President should not attend the October 14 soccer match in
Turkey, unless Turkish leaders first abide by their written agreement
to open the border. Armenian officials should not help give credence
to false Turkish claims that it is engaged in serious negotiations
with Armenia.
Armenia’s leaders should not support Turkey’s efforts to join the
European Union in order not to increase the Turks’ political and
economic strength. Given its huge population in comparison with most
other EU countries, Turkey would be entitled to a large number of
votes in the European Parliament, enabling it to pass anti-Armenian
resolutions.
Last Fall, when Turkey was desperately seeking votes to join the
U.N. Security Council, Armenia and Armenians worldwide made almost no
attempts to prevent its gaining such a critical seat for the first
time in almost half a century. Turkey can now use that prestigious
position to pass resolutions in the U.N. against Armenia and Artsakh.
In 2006, in the aftermath of Israel’s attack on Lebanon, Armenia
and Armenians did not prevent Turkey from contributing peacekeeping
troops to UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon). This
made possible the stationing of the Turkish military for the first
time since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in an Arab country that
hosts the largest Armenian community in the Middle East.
Finally, Armenians should boycott Turkish products and should not go
on vacation to Turkey in order not to contribute to the economy of a
hostile state. Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan should be commended for
ordering Armenian government officials not to spend their vacation
in Turkey and for encouraging local travel agencies to prepare tour
packages at competitive rates for Armenians to vacation in Artsakh.
There already exists an overwhelming imbalance between the political,
economic, and military strengths of Armenia and Turkey. By carefully
considering the impact of their every decision, Armenia’s leaders
should narrow, rather than increase, that imbalance!
By The Publisher of California Courier Harut Sassounian
CAMP FOR ARMENIAN AND GEORGIAN CHILDREN OPENED IN DMANISI, GEORGIA
/PanARMENIAN.Net/
05.08.2009 16:38 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ A summer for camp for Armenian and Georgian children
opened in Dmanisi, Georgia with the assistance of the fund of the
Georgian Orthodox Church and a Swiss benevolent organization.
65 Armenian and Georgian children will spend over a week in the camp.
It’s worth mentioning that 33 children from Georgia are spending
their holidays in Armenian camps this year, Georgia Online reported
THE ORIENTAL PARTNERSHIP, THE GEOPOLITICAL STAKES AND AZERBAIJAN
cafebabel.com
st/2009/08/03/THE-ORIENTAL-PARTNERSHIP,-THE-GEOPOL ITICAL-STAKES-AND-AZERBAIJAN
Aug 3 2009
On May 7th and 8th , the Czech presidency of the European Union was
able to reunite the key players of Eastern Europe in the hopes of
reestablishing ties between the EU and its ex-Soviet Union neighbors
(Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldavia and Ukraine) to
help reinforce their independence and assure new sources of energy
supplies. The EU is trying, on a basis of pragmatic cooperation,
to maintain European presence in these countries, which has lead to
speculation that it is about to encroach on the sphere of Russian
strategical interests. But appearances are deceiving.
To begin, Europe does not have a strategic global vision, and it would
be wrong to view the whole new oriental partnership as an attempt to
diminish Russian influence. Two factors support this point of view:
– Firstly, the EU is not yet a powerful political/military force and
prefers to cooperate with Russia in the handling of crises;
– Secondly, the economic ties between Russia and its immediate
neighbors are sufficiently strong, and the latter doesn’t want to
risk such a market, which absorbs their industrial and agricultural
products as well as millions of migrant workers, for a project whose
future is still uncertain.
Although certain elements of the partnership remain promising,
it is a long way off from making a useful contribution to the
emergence of an economic pole in geopolitical pluralism within the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). It is more likely destined to
promote relations between the EU and its partners and reinforce their
integration in different means of cooperation but at the same level of
interaction as with Russia. It is more a matter of complementarity of
cooperation than of competition and more about reinforced integration
than membership. It is for this reason that the affected States of the
ex-USSR adopt a more reasonable approach even if Ukraine still hopes
for full membership pure and simple. The greatest weakness of this
partnership is in fact the lack of means for its goals and above all,
its incentives in terms of membership.
Also, the new international context, which is linked to the
multilateral approach and to the more pragmatic international policy
of the new Obama Administration, tends to put Russia at ease. The
new president is fixed on two priorities – Iran and Afghanistan –
and is looking, in contrast to his predecessor, to avoid unnecessary
provocations by notably abandoning the pursuit of the new version
of the containment policy. This policy is aimed at reducing Russian
sway by promoting "revolutions of colors"in the ex-Soviet sphere
of influence, which were considered to be "natural steps" in the
strategic vision of the Kremlin. This approach seems to suit Moscow,
as it would be more advantageous for it to adopt a cooperative
approach under the condition that it maintains its dominant position
in its old guarded domain. Behind this point of view, one can find a
point of equilibrium in the relations between Russia and the United
States. For example Washington renounced its unilateral initiative
of antimissile shields in favor of a common project with Moscow,
in which they engage in problematic affairs, such as those found
in Iran and Afghanistan. This could allow for a reconfiguration
of the power struggle, and it would assure Russia that it remains
the major force in that region, allowing everyone a piece of the
pie. Indeed, the help that Russia could bring the Iranian question
would be enormous and fundamental for regional and international
security. Iran seeks to become a regional power, putting itself in
competition with NATO member and EU candidate Turkey, in order to,
among other things, contain the influence of the UnitedState. The
first trip of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after his reelection took him as
invitee to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit in
Yekaterinburg in the Ural. This organization was created in 1996 by
Russia and China to be an alternative to NATO and in response to US
influence in central Asia. Four central Asian countries are members,
all the former Soviet republics: Kazakhstan, Kirghistan, Uzbekistan and
Tajikistan. Iran holds an observer status. It is important to note,
that in October 2007, the Caspian Summit in Teheran, held during the
peak of the nuclear crisis, has been a success for Iran as well as
for Russia.
This agreeable arrangement with Russia could also contribute to
the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. Indeed, one goal of the Obama Administration is to
improve the American image in the Muslim world. In this context,
Turkey is an ally not to be ignored in connecting American interests
of becoming a regional player in the Middle East and also in the South
Caucasus. Hence the American incentives to normalize relations between
Turkey and Armenia, that have been broken off in 1993 following
the occupation of 20% of the territory of Azerbaijan by Armenian
military forces. But this issue pre-requires diplomatic progress in
finding a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which
demands a more active role of the United States and Russia. However,
the Russian motivations are different: first, by excluding such a
possibility for the resolution of the Ossetian and Abkhazian conflict,
Moscow continues its efforts to bring the Saakhashvili regime to its
knees, again to ensure direct access to Armenia, its stronghold in
the South Caucasus; then in the setting of a potential rapprochement
between Turkey and Armenia, the Kremlin thinks about balancing its
relations with Azerbaijan, while encouraging them to sell the bulk
of its natural gas to the Russian gas giant "Gazprom", which aims to
challenge the European gas pipeline "Nabucco".
Contrary to what one might think, Azerbaijan has not attempted to use
its energy weapon as a means of diplomatic pressure in the process
of normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. But it
suggested to lead the two negotiations in a single process and to
push the progress in resolving the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh
towards the rapprochement between the two countries. The historical
and cultural ties that bind the Turkish people to those of Azerbaijan
and the popular reaction that Ankara’s policy has sparked in both
countries, has made the Turkish government aware that without
eliminating the causes that led to the closing of the borders, no
action can be taken to remedy the effects. This position has relieved
Baku and "dispelled all suspicions" as declared by the President Ilham
Aliyev, following the visit of the Turkish Prime Minister on May 13,
2009. Azerbaijan considers its demand legitimate due to the fact that
20% of its territories are still under Armenian occupation. It has
called on Turkey and the international community as a whole to adopt
a common position and to stand firm in this situation, rather than
to consolidate the Armenian position at the round table negotiations
demanding open borders between Turkey and Armenia.
Azerbaijan has yet to give in to Russian requests to purchase all of
its gas as they are looking to ensure the security of their resource
routes by diversifying the pipelines in multiple directions. This is
the reason for which, in the past, they postponed the exploitation of
the second phase of the Shah Deniz well, expected to produce over 16
billion cubic meters of natural gas per annum. Under the circumstances,
Azerbaijan, which already exports gas to Turkey and Greece, was
favorable towards the "Nabucco" pipeline project to transport the
majority of its gas, although they can no longer infinitely await the
Europeans. Furthermore, with its increased gas production, it is in
need of markets and competitive prices which only Russia is taking
the initiative to offer. During President Medvedev’s visit to Baku
on the 29th of June 2009, Gazprom proceeded to sign an agreement
of purchase with the Azerbaijanis state petrol company (SOCAR)
concerning 500 million cubic meters of gas as of the 1st of January
2010. For Baku, this contract is based on commercial considerations
with prices as high as 350 dollars per 1000 cubic meters of gas. For
the moment though, the volume in question is too insignificant
to be a fatal blow by depriving "Nabucco" of a reliable and vital
source. In any case, the danger is not far off if the Europeans do
not soon decide the fate of their projects and do not rapidly offer
purchasing contracts to Azerbaijan. Wasting time could, in effect, put
an end to this project. Even more so as the key actor in the region,
which is Azerbaijan, constitutes a strategic transit zone for Central
Asia which is among the top suppliers of "Nabucco". Azerbaijan’s
eventual change of course could incite the Central Asian countries,
such as Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, to turn to Asia instead. Let us
be reminded that after the recent explosion on the pipeline between
Turkmenistan and Russia, Turkmenistan has been made more aware than
even of the vulnerability of their dependence on their large neighbor
to the north. It is no coincidence that Turkmenistan’s authorities
have recently proposed new opportunities to western companies
in the exploitation of hydro-carbons. In this colossal game, the
realization of "Nabucco" does not depend on Russian opposition with
their competing projects such as "South Stream", but largely on the
engagement of European partners. In this relationship, the European
Union has two strategic imperatives, the first being an improved
level of cooperation with Russia, which is part of Eastern Europe,
and the second being the continuation of the adhesion process for
Turkey. It is in the strategic, balanced position that the right path
can be found to its policies and the defense of its energy interests.
Olivier VEDRINE President of the Atlantic-Ural College Paris, FRANCE
Lecturer of the European Commission (TEAM EUROPE France)
IRAN CAN FEASIBLY MAKE A BOMB WITHIN A YEAR
/PanARMENIAN.Net/
03.08.2009 18:20 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Iran has perfected the technology to create and
detonate a nuclear warhead and is merely awaiting the word from its
Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to produce its first bomb,
Western intelligence sources have told The Times.
The sources said that Iran completed a research programme to create
weaponised uranium in the summer of 2003 and that it could feasibly
make a bomb within a year of an order from its Supreme Leader.
A US National Intelligence Estimate two years ago concluded that Iran
had ended its nuclear arms research programme in 2003 because of the
threat from the American invasion of Iraq. But intelligence sources
have told The Times that Tehran had halted the research because it
had achieved its aim – to find a way of detonating a warhead that
could be launched on its long-range Shehab-3 missiles.
They said that, should Ayatollah Khamenei approve the building of
a nuclear device, it would take six months to enrich enough uranium
and another six months to assemble the warhead. The Iranian Defense
Ministry has been running a covert nuclear research department for
years, employing hundreds of scientists, researchers and metallurgists
in a multibillion-dollar programme to develop nuclear technology
alongside the civilian nuclear programme.
ARMENIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS MARKS ITS 1ST ANNIVERSARY
ArmInfo
2009-08-03 10:13:00
ArmInfo. The oppositional Armenian National Congress (ANC) is one
year old.
The ANC statement says that since the very beginning Armenian
people didn’t reconcile with the fact of establishment of unlawful
authorities, and this is proved by its 10-year fight, particularly,
by means of presidential and parliamentary elections. Since spring
2007, in connection with the presidential election, this fight turned
into a pan-national movement led by the first president of Armenia
Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Over twenty political forces and hundreds of
thousands of Armenian citizens joined him.
"The unprecedented presidential election 2008 by its cynicism and
fraud and the slaughter organized by the authorities against peaceful
demonstrators on March 1 failed to stop the Pan-National Movement. On
August 1, 2008, the Armenian National Congress was created, which
proclaimed overthrowing the current unlawful regime and establishing
constitutional order as its key goal. Within a year the ANC became
the most powerful and efficient political opposition throughout the
history of the Republic of Armenia. The Congress congratulates all
the political forces included in the Congress and supporting it,
and thanks dozens of thousands of supporters for their resoluteness
in the fight for inevitable victory of the pan- national movement",
– the statement says.
IF KARABAKH CONFLICT IS NOT RESOLVED PEACEFULLY, MILITARY CONFRONTATION IS INEVITABLE: AZERBAIJANI DEFENSE MINISTER
Today.Az
cs/54325.html
Aug 3 2009
Azerbaijan
The Defense Minister of Azerbaijan Safar Abiyev met on Sunday with
Defense Minister of Russian Federation Anatoly Serdyukov traveling in
Azerbaijan on two-day working visit, the the press service of Defense
Ministry of Azerbaijan reported.
The meeting focused on prospects for military and technical cooperation
between Russia and Azerbaijan, the current military and political
situation in the Caucasus and the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict.
Abiyev said that the efforts of Russia to resolve the conflict are
appreciated and encouraging. At the same time, if the conflict is not
resolved through peaceful means, military confrontation is inevitable,
Abiyev said.
Anatoly Serdyukov thanked for the warm hospitality extended to him
during the two-day visit.
RELATIONS BETWEEN ARMENIA AND ARTSAKH SHOULD HAVE CONCEPTUAL APPROACH
/PanARMENIAN.Net/
31.07.2009 17:19 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "During the visit of the Public Council of the
Republic of Armenia in Nagorno Karabakh, we noticed some omissions in
the relations between Armenia and Artsakh, coming from the absence
of a specific concept of cooperation between our two countries,"
Hovhannes Hovhannesyan, the chairman of the committee on civil
society development of the RA Public Council, emphasized. Hovhannes
Hovhannisyan also stressed that, is there would be a concept,
Nagorno Karabakh could formally delegate authority to Armenia to
represent Artsakh in talks with Azerbaijan on the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict. Today all this is happening spontaneously, without formal
consent of NKR.
Answering the question of a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter, whether or not
the issue to cooperate with Javakhk is on the agenda of the Public
Council, Mr. Hovhannesyan said, not so far, but he is going to raise
this issue at the next board meeting.
AUTHORITIES WILL BE TO BLAME
A1+
08:18 pm | July 30, 2009
Politics
Leader of the "Heritage" faction Armen Martirosyan is expecting
steps to be taken by Serzh Sargsyan after the letter that he sent
for the immediate release of editor-in-chief of "Zhamanak-Yerevan"
newspaper Arman Babajanyan.
"Every hour in prison could be fatal for Babajanyan and if anything
happens to Babajanyan, the authorities will be to blame."
Martirosyan believes that the issue of releasing Babajanyan is not
a legal issue, but a political one.
"If they weren’t able to maintain his health condition at a normal
level at the penitentiary, they were obligated to release him
immediately and allow him to solve his health problems."
Martirosyan doesn’t understand why Babajanyan is locked up when his
term ends in September and the authorities will be forced to release
him anyway.
Martirosyan believes that the reason for political persecutions
against Babajanyan is the course taken by "Zhamanak-Yerevan".
"Babajanyan was arrested at a time when "Zhamanak-Yerevan" started
becoming popular and printed articles by representatives of the
oppositionists."
Martirosyan finds that if Serzh Sargsyan has any sense of right and
wrong, he must release Babajanyan.
What if he doesn’t? In response, Martirosyan said: "In that case,
Babajanyan will be released on September 15."
Arman Babajanyan is currently at the "Prisoners’ Hospital"
penitentiary. He is diagnosed with a brain tumor, which has an impact
on his eyesight with 35% fall in his right eye and 40% in his left
eye and a hypophisis swelling.
AZERBAIJAN’S OPPOSITION PARTIES TO HOLD TALKS ON KARABAKH PROBLEM
Today.Az
s/54234.html
July 30 2009
Azerbaijan
The Union for Democracy working group on resolution of the Karabakh
problem met in Baku on July 29, chairman of Azadlig party, part of
the union, Ahmad Oruj said.
He said representatives of the working group decided to launch talks
on the Karabakh problem with the political parties.
"The working group opposes the Madrid Principles. Each party will
express views on this issue during the talks. Regardless of results,
we plan to stage a protest action," he said.
Oruj said it is not known yet when the next Karabakh forum will
be held.
The Union for Democracy includes Classic Popular Front Party, Azadlig,
People’s Party of Azerbaijan, Great Azerbaijan and National Democratic
Party of Azerbaijan.