Author: nina hovnanian

PRESS RELEASE
Catholicosate of Cilicia
Communication and Information Department
Contact: V.Rev.Fr.Krikor Chiftjian, Communications Director
Tel: (04) 410001, 410003
Fax: (04) 419724
E- mail: [email protected]
Web:

PO Box 70 317
Antelias-Lebanon

Watch our latest videos on YouTube here:

SENIOR SEMINARIANS REPRESENT THE CATHOLICOSATE OF CILICIA AT THE MEETINGS OF
THE ASSOCIATION OF THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST (ATIME)

In November, the members of ATIME met to plan activities for 2012. Deacon
Kevork Saboundjian and a seminarian, Sarkis Garabedian, represented the
Catholicosate of Cilicia. The first activity of ATIME will be a concert of
spiritual music by the choirs of the member institutions of ATIME. The
concert will be held on 22 January 2012, during the celebrations of the Week
of Prayer of Christian Unity at St. Gregory the Illuminator Cathedral in
Antelias.

LOOKING AHEAD TO THE DECEMBER OSCE MINISTERIAL COUNCIL MEETING IN VILNIUS

AZG DAILY
02-12-2011

The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, Ambassadors Bernard Fassier
of France, Robert Bradtke of the United States, and Igor Popov of
the Russian Federation, released the following statement in Baku on
November 30:

The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group (Ambassadors Bernard
Fassier of France, Robert Bradtke of the United States, and Igor
Popov of the Russian Federation) and Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk
(Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office) traveled
November 28-30 to Yerevan and Baku. The Co-Chairs were accompanied by
Ambassador Jacques Faure, who will succeed Ambassador Fassier as the
French Co-Chair of the Minsk Group. In Yerevan the Co-Chairs met with
President Sargsian, Foreign Minister Nalbandian, and Defense Minister
Ohanyan; in Baku they met with President Aliyev, Foreign Minister
Mammadyarov, and Defense Minister Abiyev. In all these meetings,
the Co-Chairs reaffirmed the strong commitment of their countries to
assisting the sides in achieving a lasting and peaceful settlement
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Noting recent reports of incidents along the Line of Contact, the
Co-Chairs stressed again to the Presidents the importance of respecting
the 1994 ceasefire agreement. They reiterated that such incidents
demonstrate the need to implement the proposed mechanism to investigate
incidents along the front-lines, on which the Presidents have agreed
in principle. The Co-Chairs also discussed additional measures for
enhancing confidence through people-to-people exchanges and efforts
to preserve places of worship, cultural sites, and cemeteries.

On November 29, the Co-Chairs crossed the border between Armenia
and Azerbaijan by foot, and met on each side with local officials
to discuss the situation in the border region. On November 30, the
Co-Chairs met with representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh Azerbaijanis,
and underscored that a peaceful settlement must include the right
of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their
former places of residence.

Looking ahead to the December OSCE Ministerial Council meeting in
Vilnius, the Co-Chairs urged the sides to use this opportunity to
reaffirm their commitment to seeking a peaceful settlement and moving
beyond the unacceptable status quo.

ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER: THEORETICALLY TURKEY MAY USE ARMENIAN DRAFT LAW WHEN DEMANDING TO SHUT DOWN ARMENIAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT [ANPP]

arminfo
Friday, December 2, 14:26

Theoretically Turkey may use Armenian draft law when demanding to shut
down ANPP, a member of the Armenian parliament from ARF Dashnaktiutyn
party, Bagrat Sargsyan, said today during the parliamentary hearings
on alterations to the law “On environment assessment expertise”. He
recalled that besides the two main pre-conditions for opening of the
border to Armenia – refusal of the process of the world recognition of
the Armenian genocide and yielding of Nagornyy Karabakh, Turkey also
put forward a condition to shut down ANPP, the strategical significance
of which is obvious. Sargsyan says that as the alterations also
foresee the assessment of the transborder affecting the environment,
Turkey may speak about the ecological risks of ANPP located near the
Armenian-Turkish border. However, representative of Armenian Nature
Protection Ministry, Juletta Galechyan, explained that the point about
assessment of the transborder affect will be included like a principle
implementation of which depends on international agreements. She also
added that the affect will be studied only in case if two or three
countries in the zone of potential affect of the facility will make
the relevant inter-state agreement.

LE RAPPORT D’ETAPE DE L’UE SUR LA TURQUIE DE 2011 TRAFIQUE
Stephane

armenews.com
vendredi 2 decembre 2011

Comme chaque annee, le rapport de suivi de la Commission europeenne
sur les progrès des pays candidats a l’adhesion a ete rendu public
a Bruxelles.

Dans ses conclusions, la Commission pointe comme faits postifs
notamment que ” s’agissant de la liberte de reunion, il y a eu des
developpements positifs. Les ceremonies de Newroz (Nouvel An) dans le
Sud-Est et les manifestations de mai ont eu lieu dans une atmosphère
generalement calme. Ce fut aussi le cas pour les manifestations, entre
autres, contre les restrictions sur la publicite pour la consommation
d’alcool, sur la reforme judiciaire et sur la detention de suspects
dans le procès sur un pretendu coup d’etat. Plusieurs activites,
notamment la commemoration de la Journee du genocide armenien ,
organise par des intellectuels et des representants de la societe
civile pour commemorer les evenements de 1915 s’es egalement deroule
de manière pacifique “.

Le ministre turc des Affaires europeennes a publie la traduction en
turc du rapport modifiant cet article et parlant desormais de la ”
journee du soi-disant genocide armenien “. La presse turque s’est
empare du sujet et le ministère turc des Affaires europeennes a fait
marche arrière.

THERE IS NO MOVEMENT NOW
Siranuysh Papyan

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 13:50:34 – 01/12/2011

Interview with Edgar Vardanyan, ACNIS Expert

Is Levon Ter-Petrosyan~Rs recent statement that the
Republican-Bargavach Hayastan Party can change the arrangement of
political forces a way out of the crisis or just another cause for
deepening crisis and frustration?

First, it should be noted that Ter-Petrosyan did not rule our
cooperation with the Bargavach Hayastan Party in case the BHP really
wants to leave the coalition and promote free and fair elections in the
country. It is obvious, however, that the Armenian National Congress
is acting in the pre-election mode, even though the Congress states
its goal to be systemic change, taking steps which are characteristic
of parties rather than a democratic movement. The movement which could
lead to change is not found in Armenia, and the opposition forces are
trying to boost their influence under the current rules of the game,
play on internecine conflicts, pressure the government.

If we assume for a moment that the Bargavach Hayastan Party will agree,
will it not lead to loss of the civil potential?

If the opposition acts in accordance with the rules of the government,
I think they will not succeed. Some opposition forces will certainly
get into the parliament but the question is what it will bring for
these forces and the public. The problems of the society will not
be solved, though the opposition forces are not limited to the wish
to enter the parliament. With the current regime through, it will
hardly be possible to achieve equity, independence of the judiciary,
human rights protection and even social and economic welfare. I don~Rt
find the opposition able to change the rules of the game.

In other words, there is a political crisis?

And a very serious one. Now they talk more about internecine conflicts
and crisis but there is a similar crisis in the opposition. They seem
to have put up with this situation when the government sets the rules.

I think the Congress is becoming less popular. People may ask the
question how Levon Ter-Petrosyan will make sure that the BHP is
committed to free elections. If a statement is enough for that, why
shouldn~Rt he believe Serzh Sargsyan and the Republican PAtry which
also state committed to free elections?

I think the Congress is not self-confident about its ability to
mobilize the public and reach its goal. So far nobody has succeeded in
mobilization, although as soon as several hundreds of people take to
the streets, the government will leave. But they did not succeed, so
they decided to handle internecine conflicts though it will not work.

How can confidence of the public be restored?

I think there is not a civil force in Armenia yet which was formed
bottom up and pursues systemic reforms.

Political parties wish to come to power. Each of their actions pursues
this goal. It hinders systemic changes, change of the rules of the
game. The parties will not waste efforts if they know that other
forces will come to power. Should the key problem of the public be
the lack of a social and economic strategy, this problem could be
solved by a force which would come to power with such a project in
hand. But as long as the society considers its main problem to be the
anti-democratic forces, the activities of parties cannot lead to the
implementation of the main goal of government.

Therefore, Armenia needs a civil movement, a movement the ultimate
goal of which will not be power, which may consolidate all the forces
to ensure free elections.

Now there are such civil groups but they deal with problems in separate
sectors, their goal is not to change the rules of the game.

Perhaps, they do not believe in fast change of the system.

What should a democratic movement look like?

It must be a movement of carriers of democratic values who cooperate
on a horizontal platform, it must be a movement of equals. It does
not mean that there must be no leaders. But they must be elected
and must be accountable to the movement. They must be capable of
self-sacrifice, their place is the front line. And the leaders must
understand that in case of failure they must be ready to leave instead
of excusing themselves.

GLENDALE TRANSPORTATION CENTER GETS DECEASED ARMENIAN MAYOR’S STAMP

Tert.am
01.12.11

A new sign in honor of former Glendale Mayor Larry Zarian was unveiled
on Wednesday at the town’s Transportation Center, Glendale News-Press
reported.

The Amtrak and Metrolink rail station at 400 W. Cerritos Ave. was
dubbed the Larry Zarian Transportation Center, honoring the former
Glendale mayor’s extensive involvement in transportation issues.

The 16-year councilman also served on the board of the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and as a state
transportation commissioner.

LEBANESE PRESIDENT TO VISIT ARMENIA ON DEC 8

Tert.am
01.12.11

Lebanese President Michel Suleyman will start an official visit to
Armenia on December 8.

According to the Lebanon based Armenian newspaper Azdak, Suleiman is
to meet with President Serzh Sargsyan, Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan
and other senior officials.

The discussions at the meetings will focus on bilateral cooperation
and the strengthening of bilateral ties.

YES, RECONCILIATION – BUT FOR ALL!

news.az
Nov 30 2011
Azerbaijan

by Cem Oguz, head of the Turkish Center for Strategic and International
Studies.

Nowadays, it has become highly fashionable to talk about the need for
reconciliation with the past, particularly if the issue in question
is the Turkish-Armenian relations. But nobody has clarified what
reconciliation with the past means. What indeed are the prerequisites
of this vogue concept? And should it be unilateral, meaning that it
should only apply to one side, namely the Turks?

Reconciliation requires a profound break with the past. When
any imperial rule collapses, however, multiple versions of memory
spontaneously arise, each forming and mobilizing respective national
memories of the successor states or former subjects. Any reconciliation
of conflicting memories, in turn, presumes a gradual dialogue of
memories, since each party inherently sticks to its own version of
communal victimhood. In the Armenian case, the situation is more
complicated. Our Armenian friends themselves admit that memory,
after all, has been the stronghold of Armenian identity.

How then can this vicious circle which the respective parties suffer
from be overcome? By imposition from only one side, as our more
outspoken Armenian friends fervently wish? But I will pose another
simple question the answer to which is of grave importance for any
sort of healthy dialogue between the Turkish and Armenian peoples:
Have our Armenian friends managed to reconcile with their past, or
are they, too, in a state of denial and blindly trying to convince
themselves to be the only victims without any guilt? To put it more
bluntly, is anyone in Armenia, for instance, ready to objectively
discuss the Van massacre of 1915 or Khojaly massacre of 1992?

I unfortunately do not believe that the answer to this question is
“yes, they did,” because of three simple reasons: First of all, for
outspoken Armenians, the “activists,” any resolution to the dispute
means nothing more than unconditional surrender of Turkey. They live
in a world of illusions. They still believe, for instance, one day
they will be able to kick off the Turks of their “homeland,” namely
Turkey’s eastern Anatolian provinces. I do not believe that such a
line of thinking is anyhow ready for compromise. Without compromise,
however, there will be no resolution.

Secondly, the Armenian institutions that are thought to represent
civil society on the Armenian side are not helpful. Those inside
Armenia are obviously under the strict control of the government.

Given the character of the Armenian regime today, I do not believe
that they can act independently. Those of the diaspora, on the other
hand, believe that they are the first and foremost forbearers of the
“national cause.”

Thirdly, the “genocide” has become an essential part of Armenian
identity. The “genocide” is what is assumed to be uniting them. Yet
the more our Armenian friends put forward their memory, the more the
Turkish people stick to its own version of communal victim-hood.

Indeed, for Turks, the recollection doesn’t come easily because
it inherently causes a kind of self-defense reflex. At present, no
sensible Turk underestimates the extent of the tragedy suffered in
these lands over the last two centuries. However, I need to remind
all parties concerned that this tragedy is not one-sided. Turks, too,
were not immune to mass deportations, killings or having their property
confiscated by those who claim to have suffered such atrocities.

Sincere “impartial third parties,” for instance, may read of the Turks’
own tragedy in Professor Justin McCarthy’s book entitled “Death and
Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922.”

Yes, the settlement of the Armenian-Turkish dispute is indeed
imperative. However, any resolution should be based on ethics but not
politics with cunning motives. There is an urgent need for empathy,
but the parliamentary resolutions our Armenian friends are keen on
will merely justify respective standpoints, further closing doors to
dialogue. And distorting the facts will eventually backfire on those
responsible for their fabrication.

AZERBAIJANI AND ARMENIAN COMMUNITIES OF NAGORNO KARABAKH EXPECTED TO MEET IN PARIS

APA
Nov 30 2011
Azerbaijan

Baku. Habil Suleymanzadeh – APA. “The meeting of Armenian and
Azerbaijani communities of Nagorno Karabakh is expected to be held
in Paris next month”, MP Rasim Musabeyov told APA.

MP, who participated in the event named “Dialogue Forum – Nagorno
Karabakh. Meeting of Azerbaijanis and Armenians from Nagorno Karabakh”
and held in Berlin, said that the new meeting was an initiative of
Azerbaijani community of Nagorno Karabakh. He said the representatives
of Armenian community, who hadn’t participated in the last meeting in
Germany, stand in own light. “Everybody saw that Karabakh consists
not only of Armenians and it is myth that Azerbaijanis don’t accept
the idea of co-existence with Armenians”.

Musabeyov said organizers of the meeting in Berlin regretted that
Armenian community didn’t participate there. “We have explained our
position in the meeting in Berlin, but the Armenian side avoided the
contacts under the pretext of the meeting’s format. It was proved
again that Azerbaijanis are ready to co-exist with Armenians, but
Armenians not. This factor is seriously accepted in Europe”.

Many foreign experts, journalists and scientists, representatives
of Azerbaijani community of Nagorno Karabakh – MPs Rovshan Rzayev,
Rasim Musabeyov, Rector of Baku Musical Academy Farhad Badalbeyli,
employee of Effective Initiatives Center Anar Usubov, Head Physician
of Shusha Regional Central Hospital Ramig Maharramov, as well as
representatives from Armenia, government officials and scientists of
Germany participated in the meeting.

REPRESENTATIVES OF ARMENIAN NAGORNO-KARABAKH MISS BERLIN MEETING

Trend
Nov 30 2011
Azerbaijan

The representatives of the Armenian community of Nagorno-Karabakh
have not attended a meeting planned to be held in Berlin. The meeting
called Dialogue Forum – Nagorno-Karabakh. Meeting of Azerbaijanis
and Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh was held in Berlin on November 28,
the Azerbaijani community of Nagorno-Karabakh public association told
Trend today.

Despite the representatives of the Armenian community of
Nagorno-Karabakh agreed to participate in the dialogue, they didn’t
turn up.

The meeting was held with the support of the Berlin Centre for
Caspian Region Studies, the independent newspaper Evro Kavkaz and
the German-Azerbaijani forum.

The forum was attended by representatives of the Azerbaijani community
of Nagorno-Karabakh, MPs Rovshan Rzayev, Rasim Musabayov, Rector of
the Baku Music Academy Farhad Badalbayli, the Effective Initiatives
Centre political analyst Anar Usubov and the head physician of the
Shusha Central Hospital Ramig Maharramov.

They stated that after the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is resolved,
the Azerbaijani population is willing to live peacefully together
with the Armenian population within Azerbaijan. Representatives from
Armenia addressed the meeting.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 per cent of Azerbaijan since 1992,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.

Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994. The
co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia, France, and the U.S. –
are currently holding the peace negotiations.

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