An Other Protest With The Same Demand

ANOTHER PROTEST WITH THE SAME DEMAND

A1+
[07:31 pm] 06 November, 2008

"This is not an honor for our people. Many people, who have been
deprived of their assets go from door-to-door there are thousands of
women like me, who are left without children and grandchildren and are
forced to go out on the street every week," said today Luiza Hakobyan,
who lives on the street in front of the Government Building. According
to her, she has lived in a 6-room house for 5 years, but the government
has thrown her out of her house with little money and she has been
living on rent for the past five years after that. "Let them give me
a normal house or a decent amount of money," she says.

As every Thursday, the people who have lost their homes were
standing in front of the government building and demanding a normal
compensation. They also wanted to meet with the Prime Minister.

Tigran Piloyan, who lives on 38 Aram Street, says that he is first
and foremost fighting for his rights. He has not signed any contract,
but they have compensated 64,000 dollars for his 200 square meter
area. He had 40 fruit trees, 60 bushes of Dutch roses on his land,
but he didn’t receive any compensation for that. "They keep talking
about greenery, but they destroyed all that greenery and left it
under the bulldozers," says Tigran Piloyan.

Presidents Of Armenia, France Discuss Bilateral Relations

PRESIDENTS OF ARMENIA, FRANCE DISCUSS BILATERAL RELATIONS

armradio.am
05.11.2008 12:01

Within the framework of his visit to France the President of Armenia,
Serzh Sargsyan had a meeting with the Prime Minister of France
Francois Fillon and the President of Senate Gerard Larcher. Issues
related to the further development of friendly Armenian-French
relations, deepening of the economic collaboration, activation of
interparliamentary cooperation and contacts, regional developments, as
well as an inclusive framework of questions connected with Armenia-EU
cooperation were discussed. In the Senate President Sargsyan left a
note in the Book of Honorable Gusts.

The President of Armenia also met with world known singer, National
Hero of the Republic of Armenia Charles Aznavour.

In the second half of the day Serzh Sargsyan had a meeting with the
President of the Republic of France Nicolas Sarkozy. This was Serzh
Sargsyan’s first meeting with Nicolas Sarkozy as President of Armenia.

The agenda of talks between the leaders of Armenia and France included
issues related to the further deepening of Armenian-French friendly
relations, the current stage of negotiations on the Karabakh conflict
settlement, the Armenian-Turkish dialogue, the latest events in the
region, a broad framework of issues related to Armenia-EU cooperation.

The Presidents of the two countries expressed appreciation for the
continuousness of the traditionally warm and friendly relations and
agreed to continue the high-level contacts, which will contribute to
the deepening of Armenian-French ties.

The Presidents positively assessed the growth of commodity
turnover between the two countries, expressing willingness to take
necessary steps in the direction of deepening the bilateral economic
collaboration.

President Sargsyan emphasized the important role of France, as
Minsk Group Co-Chair country, in the peaceful settlement of the
Karabakh issue. The President of France expressed his support for
the diplomatic efforts targeted at the settlement of the conflict
and the Armenian-Turkish political dialogue.

The leaders of the two countries emphasized the invaluable role
of the Armenian community of France in the reinforcement of the
Armenian-French friendship.

At the end of the working visit to France Serzh Sargsyan gave an
interview to leading French media.

Can Only Welcome The Presidents’ Declaration

CAN ONLY WELCOME THE PRESIDENTS’ DECLARATION
Lilit Poghosyan

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
04 Nov 08
Armenia

Political Scientist Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan represents his standpoints
regarding the outcome of the trilateral meeting, initiated by Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev, which took place on November 2 in Moscow,
and regarding the declaration signed by the Presidents of Armenia,
Russia and Azerbaijan.

"This is the first document during the recent 14 years, after the
protocol signed in Bishkek, in 1994, by the Presidents of Armenia and
Azerbaijan. In my view the trilateral meeting between the Presidents is
a real progress. In fact it is a promise not to use force, a commitment
by which the two parties reiterate that the conflict must be solved by
means of negotiations, in the framework of a peaceful process. This
creates prerequisites to continue the negotiation process in a more
quite and constructive atmosphere.

On the other hand it is evident that Russia anticipates re-establishing
its influence in South Caucasus. Judging from the Moscow meeting they
are managing it, and if this anticipation is brought into line with
peace, something that is enshrined in the joint declaration signed
by the Presidents then I must say that we can only and only welcome
this action."

"But, for unknown reasons, the principle of not using force is not
enshrined in all the 5 points of the declaration. In your view what was
it that prevented the Presidents from clearly enshrining this clause?"

"Yes, the declaration doesn’t directly speak about it, but the idea
is emphasized in all the points some way or another. On the whole, it
is clearly underscored that the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
arranged to continue their touches on high level and agreed that they
must look for the formula of the political settlement of the conflict
on the legal plane.

And this is really logical.

Why? Finally Armenian-Azerbaijani confrontation line crosses through
Artsakh and Azerbaijan and not Armenia and Azerbaijan. I have already
underscored many times and I will always say that the real negotiation
phase, that is to say the main process of the peaceful settlement will
start only after Azerbaijan and Artsakh, – Baku and Stepanakert sign a
document on not using force. It will be nonsense to include that clause
in the trilateral declaration signed by the Presidents, because I must
repeat, after all the conflict is not between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

All the other formulations are beneficial for Armenia. With this
regard the declaration really provides an opportunity to create an
effective atmosphere of dialogue for the settlement of the conflict. It
is particularly underscored that the two parties must assist in
the amelioration of the situation in the region, establishment of
stability and security in South Caucasus and that they must look for
the formula of the settlement in the context of the international
principles, norms of international law and the decision taken and
documents signed in that framework.

It is more than beneficial for us, taking into account the fact that
the birth of Artsakh, the realization of NKR’s people’s right to
self-determination, which took place on September 2 1991, totally
comply with the norms of international law."

"The principle of the territorial integrity is one of the norms of
international law. Even a word about the before mentioned fact gives
rise to panic and malevolence among certain part of society and the
circles of Armenian Pan National Movement."

"President Robert Kocharyan was quite right to say that we have no
objections to Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity, for the simple
reason that Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is not breached. NKR’s
international recognition won’t breach Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity. Because first of all Azerbaijan itself has refused the
heritage left by the Soviet Azerbaijan, which means it has refused the
administrative borders. Secondly not only Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous
Region but also the entire Karabkh have illegally been annexed to
Soviet Azerbaijan."

"Which means the leaders of Armenian Pan National Movement must over
again be disappointed and they shouldn’t hurry to create panic among
the public saying that an "exclusive" situation has been created in
the negotiations. LTP even refused the demonstration."

"L. Ter-Petrosyan can continue holding demonstrations, because he
will never hinder the process of the settlement of Karabakh conflict.

Ter-Petrosyan, Aram Manukyan, Levon Zurabyan, and all the other members
of that team simply voice their dreams and far not the reality. It
is the fruit of their "frozen" imagination.

Of course they are longing to see such an agreement that could be
easily speculated by them, to show it as an example of weakness
manifested by the ruling power, defeatism, which could give a new
energy to their struggle for power, even at the cost of ceding the
territories of our motherland.

I must disappoint them. This thing will never happen. Artsakh will
remain independent, as it has been after 1991. None of the superpowers
is interested in the war in the region. And cession usually means
new war.

During the recent 10 years, the Armenian authorities haven’t displayed
similar intention. So our people don’t have any reason for concern,
no one is going to solve issues at the cost of the territories of
our motherland."

"Thus you don’t see any reason for "panic".

"On the contrary I was following the Moscow meeting of the two
Presidents by TV and by Internet and I really don’t see any reason
for concern. It is enough to look at the facial expressions of the
two Presidents, Serge Sargsyan, and Ilham Aliev when they were signing
the document and everything will be clear."

Azerbaijan: Moscow Brings Pressure To Bear On Baku

AZERBAIJAN: MOSCOW BRINGS PRESSURE TO BEAR ON BAKU
Stephen Blank

EurasiaNet
Nov 4 2008
NY

Aiming to build on its military success in Georgia, Russia is bringing
pressure to bear on Azerbaijan. Moscow’s intent is to coerce Baku
into going along with the Kremlin’s grand plan to remake the Caucasus’
security and energy framework.

Moscow’s chief desire is to keep US and NATO influence in the region to
a minimum, and even eliminate it altogether. With Georgia corralled and
Armenia effectively in Moscow’s pocket, it would seem that Azerbaijan
now holds the key to the realization of the Kremlin’s ambitions. [For
background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Baku’s most sensitive pressure point is clearly the Nagorno-Karabakh
issue, and, not surprisingly, that is where Russia is exerting the
most force. As the November 2 talks in Moscow on the Karabakh issue
underscored, the Kremlin has made it known that it will not tolerate
any effort to settle the territorial dispute by force. [For background
see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Russia’s mediation efforts are
clearly designed to be seen in Baku as an offer that Azerbaijani
leaders cannot refuse.

Moscow’s insistence on the renunciation of possible use of force —
a concept endorsed in a declaration signed by both Armenian President
Serzh Sargsyan and his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev on November
2 — has the effect of severely limiting Baku’s options. Of course,
Moscow’s opposition to the use of force can be justified for many
reasons, but it also is probably the only way Baku could ever stand
a realistic chance of recovering its lost lands. All of this means
that Russia has imposed limits on Azerbaijan’s negotiating position,
leaving Baku in an extremely disadvantageous position.

Since key issues in the Karabakh peace process have yet to be resolved
— namely the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, possession of the Lachin
corridor and the deployment of peacekeeping forces — the results
of the Moscow summit could cause other issues that were agreed upon
earlier to be reopened. Ultimately, it probably does not matter much
to Russia how the outstanding issues are decided, as an open-ended
peace process serves Moscow’s purpose, giving the Kremlin a lever
with which it can exert influence on both Yerevan and Baku.

Moscow’s pressure on Baku does not end with the Karabakh issue. Reports
have circulated that Moscow wants a military base in Azerbaijan
— i.e. an expanded presence for a longer duration at the Qabala
air defense base — and also a stronger position in Azerbaijan’s
economy. In particular, Russia is eager to integrate Azerbaijan into
the Kremlin’s Caspian energy framework. This objective has taken
on an added sense of urgency because Russia, Iran, and Qatar are
now seriously exploring the creation of a natural gas cartel, and
because Turkmenistan’s gas fields have been shown to be of world-class
size. Azerbaijan, another major gas producer in the Caspian Basin,
is the only holdout that is preventing Russia from monopolizing
trans-Caspian energy flows to Europe.

Moscow apparently will not be satisfied unless it can achieve a
controlling interest over Baku’s security orientation. This would
involve arms sales, the training of officers, close participation
in the drafting of Azerbaijan’s national security concept, and the
reformulation of military doctrine all in a way that would promote
Baku’s closer cooperation with the Moscow-dominated Collective
Security Treaty Organization, as well as with the newly proposed
Caspian Economic Cooperation. Obviously, the key prize here is
the redirecting of Azeri energy flows through Russian pipelines to
effectively render the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline strategically
meaningless. During the Russian-Georgian war, Baku, acting prudently,
redirected some of its energy flows from the BTC route to Russian
installations. Moscow now wants to make this shift permanent.

It is clear that the sum total of all these Russian initiatives
is to circumscribe Azerbaijan’s sovereignty and bring Baku fully
under Moscow’s sphere of influence, as envisioned by President
Dmitry Medvedev on August 31. Such policies fit well with Moscow’s
long-standing efforts to integrate CIS states into the various
organizations that the Kremlin controls, and which seek to exclude
Westerns states from the Caucasus and Central Asia.

What should be of particular concern to policymakers in Washington
and in European capitals, especially Berlin, is the Kremlin’s naked
desire to undermine the foundations of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty and,
indeed, the sovereignty of every other government in the CIS. Russian
pressure will undoubtedly continue, and likely grow more intense, in
the absence of a coherent Western response. It is imperative in the
coming weeks and months for the United States and the European Union
to adopt a united position that shows leaders in Baku and elsewhere
in the Caspian Basin that when it comes to relations with Russia,
they are not on their own.

Editor’s Note: Stephen Blank is a professor at the US Army War
College. The views expressed this article do not in any way represent
the views of the US Army, Defense Department or the US Government.

Georgian War Uncovered Karabakh Status Quo Shakiness

GEORGIAN WAR UNCOVERED KARABAKH STATUS QUO SHAKINESS

PanARMENIAN.Net
03.11.2008 14:01 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Georgian war uncovered the shakiness of Karabakh
status quo, EU Envoy said.

"The sides manage to control the balance of force in the region but
the situation is explosive. The Georgian clashes proved that conflicts
cause isolation and hardships and jeopardize security of transport
communications," EU Special Representatives for the South Caucasus
Peter Semneby said during an Armenian-Azeri conference in Brussels
initiated by International Alert October 27-30.

The status quo can burst any moment and our task is to prevent it,
a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter quoted the EU official as saying.

Radical Movement Against Territorial Concessions To Azerbaijan Creat

RADICAL MOVEMENT AGAINST TERRITORIAL CONCESSIONS TO AZERBAIJAN CREATED IN ARMENIA

Today.Az
s/48643.html
Oct 31 2008
Azerbaijan

"Armenia must recognize independence of Karabakh within the borders,
defined by a ceasefire agreement of 1994 with its further annexation
to Armenia", consider members of the new public initiative "Union",
created at a press conference in Yerevan on October 30.

The aim of this organization is formation of a public opinion based
on the rejection of the territorial concessions to Azerbaijan during
the resolution of the Karabakh conflict: involvement of social and
political powers, sharing the same approach to the resolution of the
conflict; creating a legal package with its further presentation
to the Armenian powers about recognition and annexation of "NKR"
to Armenia within the borders, fixed by an agreement on ceasefire
between Armenia and Azerbaijan of 1994.

"We have already agreed to concessions in 1994 drawing a line
between the lands controlled by Armenia and Azerbaijan. Any changes
in borders will lead to a new war, as it implies the life and security
of each resident of Nagorno Karabakh", noted the member of the public
initiative, deputy of Heritage opposition faction Zarui Postanjan.

"The reality is that Nagorno Karabakh has formed as a state and
Armenia and Karabakh can not exist without each other. The territory
of "NKR" and the security belt around it should be attached a legal
status. We must prepare a legal package and attain recognition of
Nagorno Karabakh along with the liberated lands by the powers of
Armenia and its further annexation to Armenia", added the deputy.

"The territorial concessions in the resolution of the Karabakh problem
will lead to the collapse of the whole security system in the said
region and a new war with Azerbaijan", considers another participant
of the "Union" initiative Alexander Kananyan.

He considers that Russia is strongly interested with the territorial
concessions by the Armenian side.

"After the South Ossetian conflict Russia, controlling South Ossetia
and Abkhazia, lost the territory of the rest of Georgia. And now
attempting to bypass Georgia, thus depriving it of the role of a
transit state, Russia intends to create a corridor between Armenia and
Turkey and then from Armenia to Azerbaijan. Yet, for all this Russia
offers Armenia to cede the liberated lands of Karabakh to Azerbaijan",
said Kananyan.

http://www.today.az/news/politic

Film On Karabakh War Demonstrated In United Arab Emirates

FILM ON KARABAKH WAR DEMONSTRATED IN UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

DE FACTO
28.10.08

YEREVAN, 28.10.08. DE FACTO. A Vardan Hovhannisian’s documentary titled
"A Story of People in War and Peace" was demonstrated in the United
Arab Emirates on October 21-22.

According to the RA MFA Press Office, the film was, in part,
demonstrated in the cities of Dubai and Sharjah and was highly
appreciated.

To note, the film has already been shown in the U. S. and a number
of European countries. It was awarded with international prizes.

Azerbaijan is stuck in geopolitical conundrum

The International Herald Tribune, France
October 24, 2008 Friday

Azerbaijan is stuck in geopolitical conundrum;
It needs to co-exist with East and West

by Sabrina Tavernise – The New York Times Media Group
BAKU, Azerbaijan

This country has always had tricky geography. To its north is
Russia. To its south is Iran. And ever since the collapse of the
Soviet Union it has looked west, inviting U.S. companies to develop
its oil reserves and embracing NATO.

But since Russia and Georgia fought a short war this summer, its path
has narrowed.

Azerbaijan, a small, oil-rich country on the Caspian Sea, has balanced
the interests of Russia and the United States since it won its
independence from the Soviet Union. It accepts NATO training but does
not openly state an intention to join. U.S. planes can refuel on its
territory, but U.S. soldiers cannot be based there.

”Azerbaijan is doing a dance between the West and Russia,” said Isa
Gambar, an Azerbaijani opposition figure. ”Until now, there was an
unspoken consensus. Georgia was with the West, Armenia was an outpost
of Russia, and Azerbaijan was in the middle.”

But with the war in Georgia, Russia burst back into the region,
humiliating Tbilisi and its sponsor, the United States, which issued
angry statements but was powerless to stop the Russian advance. It was
a sobering sight for former Soviet states, and one that is quite
likely to cause countries like Azerbaijan to recalibrate their
policies.

”The chess board has been tilted and the pieces are shifting into
different places,” said Paul Goble, a U.S. expert on the region who
teaches at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy in Baku, the capital.

”What looked balanced before does not look balanced now,” he added.

A Western official, referring to Azerbaijan, said: ”Georgia was very
much a wake-up call. This is what the Russians can do and are prepared
to do. Georgia events underscored their vulnerability.”

Azerbaijan will be under more pressure from Russia when undertaking
energy contracts and pipeline routes that Russia opposes, said one
Azerbaijani official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because
of the sensitivity of the matter. Officials from the Russian gas
monopoly, Gazprom, on a trip here in the spring, offered to buy
Azerbaijani gas at European prices, rather than the former reduced
rate. That offer, if the Azerbaijanis chose to accept it, could
sabotage a Western-backed gas pipeline project called Nabucco.

Rasim Musabayov, a political commentator in Baku, said that under the
new conditions, many Azerbaijanis think that selling gas to Russia is
not such a bad idea.

New projects carry political risks, he said, and if Russia ”will pay
us a price we agree on for our gas, why build something new?”

”You can’t have a foreign policy that goes against your geography,”
he added. ”We have to get along with the Russians and the Iranians.”

After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia was weak, with a collapsed
economy and a scattered, inconsistent foreign policy.

Azerbaijan used that to its advantage. Now Russia is stronger and
speaks with one voice, and Azerbaijan has to be more careful in its
relations with its big neighbor.

Georgia is now so hostile to Russia that working with it as a partner
in the region is increasingly difficult, said Borut Grgic, chairman of
the Institute for Strategic Studies in Ljubljana, Slovenia, and an
expert on Caspian energy infrastructure.

”Azerbaijan will never seek EU-NATO integration at the expense of
functional and working relations with Russia,” he said. The Georgian
president, Mikheil Saakashvili, he said, ”is making this balance
difficult to sustain.”

At no point in the crisis did Azerbaijan take a position that would
have made Moscow bristle. When the fighting began, Azerbaijan appealed
to Russia, asking it to preserve its infrastructure in Georgia – a
port, an oil terminal and a pipeline. Moscow agreed, according to the
Azerbaijani foreign minister, Elmar Mammadyarov.

Azerbaijan helped European diplomats enter Georgia while it was under
attack, but when the leaders of Ukraine, the Baltics and Poland
traveled to Tbilisi to express solidarity with the Georgians, the
Azerbaijani president, Ilham Aliyev, did not make the trip. And after
Vice President Dick Cheney visited Baku in September, Aliyev flew
immediately to Moscow for talks with the Russians.

But the issue closest to this country’s heart is that of
Nagorno-Karabakh, an area in its southwest where Armenian separatists
formed an independent enclave in the 1990s. For years, Azerbaijan has
tried, through international mediation, to reclaim the territory and
allow Azerbaijani refugees who fled to return.

Since the war this summer, the Russians seem to have grabbed the
initiative. President Dmitri Medvedev, on a trip to Yerevan, Armenia,
this week, said Russia was pushing for a meeting between the
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents.

”I hope such a meeting will take place in Russia,” Medvedev said,
Reuters reported.

Russia has traditionally backed the Armenians, but times are changing.

”One of the positive effects of the Georgian crisis is that the
Kremlin will try to show that they are not crazy guys,” an
Azerbaijani official said. ”That they can be good neighbors, too.”

The Russian attitude toward Azerbaijan, one Azerbaijani official said,
was that ”the U.S. has come to your country and is plundering your
natural resources, but is not giving you any support. Why not go with
us instead?”

Cheney, on his visit to Baku, also pledged to redouble efforts,
causing some Azerbaijanis to remark ruefully that it took him eight
years to make the trip.

Ali Hasanov, an official in the Azerbaijani presidential
administration, said concrete progress would win many points in Baku.

”If a big country takes a position, stands on the side of unbroken
territory, we will follow its interests,” he said.

Seminar On Interaction Between The Media And State Press Services In

SEMINAR ON INTERACTION BETWEEN THE MEDIA AND STATE PRESS SERVICES IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY

armradio.am
24.10.2008 13:24

A training seminar on "Interaction between the media and state
press services in a democratic society" will be held in Yerevan on
27 October.

Free access to government-held information is a key for promoting
good governance and increasing transparency of state institutions.

Around 40 representatives of the state press and public relations
services and journalists will participate in a two-day training
seminar. The aim is to build confidence between them through
professional discussions and personal dialogue. The seminar will be
conducted by invited professional trainers – Zoya Kazanzhy, Yevhen
Hlibovytsky, Mikhail Melnikov.

The event is organized by the OSCE Office in Yerevan and the OSCE
Representative on Freedom of the Media.

Ambassador Sergey Kapinos, Head of the OSCE Office in Yerevan,
Mr. Manvel Badalyan, Chairman of the Civil Service Council of the
Republic of Armenia, Mr. Alexander Boldyrev, Senior Adviser to the
OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media will open the event.

New York Times – A Prize-Winning Cellist Opens Young Artists Series

A PRIZE-WINNING CELLIST OPENS YOUNG ARTISTS SERIES
By Steve Smith

New York Times
/24youn.html?_r=1&ref=music&oref=slogin
Oc tober 24, 2008
United States

Narek Hakhnazaryan, an Armenian cellist who turned 20 on Thursday, has
already won enough prizes to fill two paragraphs in his professional
biography. Among the latest entries is first prize in this year’s Young
Concert Artists International Auditions. On Tuesday Mr. Hakhnazaryan
reaped a major benefit of the award: a Zankel Hall recital opening
Young Concert Artists’ 48th season.

Mr. Hakhnazaryan, tall and wiry, projected intensity from the moment
he took the stage. But rather than opening with fireworks, he started
with Schumann’s genial "Fantasiestucke." Mr. Hakhnazaryan’s tone was
lean but warm and supple, animating Schumann’s lyrical phrases with
grace. Noreen Polera, a pianist, was an alert, responsive partner.

Beethoven’s Cello Sonata No. 3 (Op. 69) cast Mr. Hakhnazaryan and
Ms. Polera as equals in a balancing act pitched between Classical
elegance and Romantic expressiveness. They negotiated the sonata’s
capricious moods and quirky rhythms with compelling unanimity at
a slightly subdued overall dynamic that made bold accents leap off
the page.

Mr. Hakhnazaryan demonstrated his considerable technical prowess in the
unaccompanied Sonata No. 1 by Adam Khudoyan, an Armenian composer. The
work, from 1961, packed folkish melodies, tricky combinations of
simultaneous bowing and plucking, a passage in ghostly harmonics
and more into a dense continuous span. Abrupt transitions made the
piece seem restless and occasionally aimless, but Mr. Hakhnazaryan’s
commitment was persuasive.

In a commanding account of Shostakovich’s Cello Sonata in D minor,
the martial rhythms that interrupt the opening movement’s melodic
outpouring felt especially charged and brittle. Mr. Hakhnazaryan
brought a daredevil verve to the intricate Scherzo and opened the
stark Largo with an eerie, vibrato-free tone.

A gorgeous rendition of Rachmaninoff’s "Vocalise" offered gentle
relief, and the program ended with Paganini’s flamboyant Variations
on One String on a Theme by Rossini, transcribed from the original
violin version.

A hearty response from the audience brought two encores: a gorgeous
account of the Andante from Rachmaninoff’s Cello Sonata and a
rollicking romp through "Expromt," by the Armenian composer Alexander
Arutiunian. To the very end, Mr. Hakhnazaryan’s intense focus and
expressive artistry never flagged.

The next performance in the Young Concert Artists series is on
Dec. 10 at Merkin Concert Hall, 129 West 67th Street, Manhattan;
(212) 307-6655, yca.org.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/arts/music