Author: nina hovnanian

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT MEETS WITH LITHUANIAN DELEGATION

Tert.am
28.10.11

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan has met with the Lithuanian
delegation headed by Modestas Kaseliauskas, Chairman of Lithuanian
State Revenue Committee.

According to a press release by the presidential office, Sargsyan
discussed with him issues related to economic relations between
Armenia Lithuania.

Attending the meeting was also Gagik Khachatryan, Chairman of Armenia’s
State Revenue Committee, who presented to the president the agreements
related to cooperation between the two agencies reached with his
Lithuanian counterpart.

The parties also highlighted the importance of exchanging experience
in the sphere of tax reforms.

RA PRESIDENT GETS ACQUAINTED WITH THE WORK OF “ARMENIA WINE” FACTORY

ARMENPRESS
October 28, 2011
YEREVAN

Within the framework of the working visit to the Armenian province
of Aragatsotn, President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan got acquainted
with the works of the “Armenia Wine” wine-making company in the
Sasunik community.

Speaking to reporters, director of the factory Grigory Alexanyan
said for getting competitive wine in the international market it is
necessary to apply modern technology and devices, the company has
carried out an investment program in the wine-making sphere at the
same restoring the wine-making traditions in Armenia.

“The investment program of the company in October 2011 amounted to
9.5 million euros. French classic technology has been chosen as a way
of preparation of wine. Contemporary Italian and German filtration
devices are applied in the production,” Alexanyan said.

As to the grape purchasing works in 2011, the director of the factory
said no decrease of prices was registered and the white grape was
bought by 130 AMD, the red one of the Ararat valley by 140-150 AMD.

RA President was accompanied by the Economy Minister Tigran Davtyan
and Minister of Agriculture Sergo Karapetyan.

CROSS-BORDER ROADS ARE PERILOUS
by Kadri Gursel

Milliyet, Turkey
Oct 24 2011

Last Friday [21 October] when the General Staff refuted news in the
Turkish media that an extensive cross-border operation was being
carried out on Iraqi soil, by a quirk of fate US President Obama
announced that US forces in Iraq would have withdrawn completely by
the end of 2011.

Even though it may be a coincidence that both these situations were
announced on the same day, there is a connection that is not at all
coincidental between the Turkish army being lured, or not, by the
PKK into Iraq and the United States pulling out of Iraq.

Given the agreement that went into effect in the last days of 2008,
it was already known that the American units in Iraq were going to be
pulled out completely by the end of this year. In the end, the entire
complement of US servicemen in Iraq on 1 Jan 2012 will consist of a
few hundred US Marines guarding the US Embassy in Baghdad.

The upshot is that with this withdrawal of forces the American tutelage
and influence in Iraq will be considerably less than it has been come
1 Jan 2012.

Disingenuous Overtures

The “Kurdish Overture” that was cooked up in 2008 and served in 2009
was aimed at preserving stability in Iraq in this respect.

Back then a stabilizing role for Turkey had been envisaged in order
to prevent the Arabs and the Kurds fighting one another after the
US forces had pulled out; a fight that would result in the complete
fragmentation of the country. In order to play this role Turkey
needed to normalize its relations with the Iraqi Kurds. In order for
this to happen, the Kurd problem in Turkey needed to be put on track
for a solution so that the Turkish army would not have to enter Iraq
all the time when provoked by the PKK. The Kurdish administration’s
authority was not to be threatened, which would upset the stability
in the region.

And so the “Kurdish overture” was a window of opportunity for Turkey
opened from the outside.

The AKP [Justice and Development Party] administration in 2009 found
quite unexpectedly before it the “Kurdish Overture” in the conditions
of the power struggle that had brought it up against the military,
and it made use of this. Naturally, they made it through the 2009-2010
period by making seemingly possible overtures such as the “Armenian
Overture.” The outside political and moral support it received in
exchange for this helped bring the military tutelage to its knees. The
AKP administration strangled the former central media behind the
so-called overture screen. The screams made during this surgery were
muffled by this “sound proofing” and not heard clearly in the West.

As the AKP government used these overtures in order to fix its own
problems, the overtures have actually made the real problems -the
Kurd and Armenian problems -even more convoluted today.

This is the reality that underpins the plan behind the situation
compelling the Turkish army to enter Iraq a little or a lot for the
umpteenth time.

Even If You Say, “Ah, the 1990s…”

Still, the conditions are not very conducive for the military option,
when compared to the 1990s. Back then the Iraqi Kurds owed Turkey
for their existence despite Saddam’s forces because Turkey was host
to Hammer Force/Northern Watch, and the Turkish army was able to go
into Iraq in pursuit of the PKK whenever it wanted to. Parliament’s
rejection of the Authorization Bill of 1 March 2003 effectively
removed Turkey from the Iraq equation. Since that time Turkey has
not been able to mount strategic cross-border operations. All the
same, Turkey is able to enter northern Iraq for long periods of time,
but it can only do this at the risk of paying an unpredictably high
diplomatic, political and moral price.

In the meantime, if a Kurdish-Arab conflict breaks out in 2012 or later
and if Turkey takes the Iraqi Kurds under its wing then conditions
similar to the 1990s may well emerge again.

Back in the 1990s Turkey used Israel to balance out Syria and Iran,
which were supporting the PKK at various levels. But now none of them
can balance each other out because Turkey is in deep conflict with
all three. And all three of them are open to using the PKK. This is
why our prime minister, just like his predecessors, is giving speeches
implying that the PKK is acting as a catspaw for hostile neighbours.

Back in the 1990s Turkey was a “hard power” country that barely
recognized human rights. If Turkey today returns to the 1990s in
terms of ignoring human rights and liberties in its fight against
the PKK it stands to lose a great deal on the world stage.

The solution lies not across the border but behind it. Let us look
for that solution not in the 1990s but in the present.

[translated from Turkish]

TANER AKCAM: CONFRONTING 1915 IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO BE RID OF ERGENEKON

Today’s Zaman

Oct 27 2011
Turkey

On Wednesday I attempted to summarize the European Court of Human
Rights’ (ECtHR) judgment in the case of Taner Akcam v. Turkey, in
which the court found that Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code
(TCK), which concerns the denigration of Turkishness, violates the
freedom of expression.

I believe this was a landmark decision and will force Turkey to
eliminate this law in the future. I asked Akcam what he thinks
about the decision and about Article 301, whether he feels more
comfortable after receiving this judgment in the case, and whether
this decision will help Turkey confront its past. Akcam sent me
some thought-provoking responses to my questions and remarks on the
importance of confronting the past in general. I would like to share
Professor Akcam’s comments with you:

“This ruling will in fact work in Turkey’s favor. The decision
helps the country take a step forward on a matter which is a problem
everyone’s been aware of for years now. There’s this law out there but
the executive branch obstructs its implementation and enforcement. In
other words, they [the government] are behaving as though the very
law they created doesn’t exist. Could this situation get any more
ridiculous?

“We [Turkey] act like this with every single issue. We know there’s
a problem but instead of really resolving it, we act ‘as if’ we are
solving it. We wait for a ruling from the ECtHR even with respect to
a simple and ordinary application on freedom of speech and the rule
of law. Was that really necessary? For this reason alone, I cannot
take any joy in this decision.

“But let me draw your attention to a much more important aspect of
this issue: The ruling is historically important because the court
points out the close relationship between discourse on history
and democracy. Very simply said, in 1915, around 1 million Ottoman
Armenian citizens were annihilated. I know that just saying these words
outrages many people, and actually it’s this anger that has fueled
the government’s equating historical discourse with ‘crime’ under
Article 301. Even our newspapers prefer to refer to ‘the historian
who defends the Armenian side’s arguments’ rather than ‘the historian
whose freedom of speech has been impeded’ when covering news on this
case. What we need to realize is this: If you cannot speak freely
on history, you cannot call your country a democracy and you cannot
create a society and a future that respect human rights. There is no
‘Armenian’ side or ‘Turkish’ side to history. To discuss what really
happened in history is to speak freely and openly about it, without
legends or myths. Today, no one refers to a ‘German version’ or a
‘Jewish version’ when they’re discussing the Holocaust.

“Turkey has made huge progress in democratization by way of the Balyoz
and Ergenekon investigations in recent years. It has acted to reduce
the influence of the military’s guardianship regime. But democracy
won’t be achieved solely by taking the military out of politics.

Everybody needs to focus on this connection: Those who organized
hatred against Armenians and Christians in Turkey, those who staged
smear campaigns against Hrant Dink and myself, and those who ran the
campaigns against the ‘genocide lies’ by defending the murderers
of 1915 are basically members of the Ergenekon circle. Article
301 is essentially a law propounded by the Ergenekon circle. Now
the pro-Ergenekon figures are locked up in prison, but their law,
Article 301, is still in effect. Let us not forget that it was the
pro-Ergenekon figures who criminalized speaking about history and
equated it to treason and insulting Turkishness. They were the ones
behind all the cases filed against Hrant and it was because of them
that I initiated the application process to the ECtHR. If we do not
want Turkey to fall under the influence of the military guardianship
once again, if we do not want to revive Ergenekon, we have to learn
how to speak about what happened in 1915 and admit that a grave
injustice was done in the past. The ECtHR reminded us of this fact
with its ruling.

“Now we, as a nation in the midst of creating a new constitution,
need to rid ourselves of those bits of law which are the final
remnants of Ergenekon. There is a direct link between denying what
happened in 1915, accusing those who want to talk about it of being
‘pro-Armenian’ and ‘traitors,’ and being pro-Ergenekon. I know it
is hard for many of us to accept this, but this is the crux of the
matter. We are either on the side of Article 301 and those who accuse
others of being traitorous when they discuss history freely, or we are
people of free conscience who are part of a free Turkey that speaks
freely about its own history and views the future with confidence,
while condemning the murders of the past. We have no third option.

“I consider myself a part of Turkish civil society and will continue
together with it to do whatever I can to make sure that Article 301
is removed from the TCK. That article was the murderer of Hrant Dink.

This murderous provision must be removed immediately. Turkey is
better than that. I am dedicating the court’s ruling to Parliament
Speaker Cemil Cicek. In the past, he has expressed support for this
murderous provision. Now it is up to him to clear up the mess. This
is his duty to Hrant Dink and all victims.”

ELMAR MAMMADYAROV: “THE BIGGEST OBSTACLE FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT IS THAT AZERBAIJANI LANDS ARE STILL OCCUPIED BY ARMENIA”

Milaz.info
Oct 27 2011
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijani Minister of Foreign Affairs Elmar Mammadyarov has met
with delegation headed by EU Special Representative for South Caucasus
and Crisis in Georgia Phillip Lefort.

Press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told APA that at
first, EU Representative congratulated Azerbaijan on its election
as the non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for 2012-2013
and wished successes. Lefort called the non-permanent membership of
this authoritative organization as a great achievement for such young
country as Azerbaijan.

Lefort stressed the great opportunities for the development of
EU-Azerbaijan cooperation.

Elmar Mammadyarov expressed confidence that Azerbaijan will
effectively work in the solution of global and regional issues during
its non-permanent membership at the UN Security Council. Minister said
earlier Azerbaijan joined different humanitarian missions and generally
the country attached special importance to the cooperation with the
international organizations. He said Azerbaijan had rich culture
and he believed our country would contribute to the development of
multiculturalism in the world.

Minister of Foreign Affairs called the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno
Karabakh conflict as a highest priority of our foreign policy and
said it was biggest problem of Azerbaijan.

Minister said the biggest obstacle for the settlement of the conflict
is that Azerbaijani lands are still occupied by Armenia.

The sides exchanged views on other issues, which cause mutual interest.

FOREIGN POLICY JOURNAL: IN 1918-1920 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY DID NOT RECOGNIZE AZERBAIJAN’S AUTHORITY OVER NAGORNO-KARABAKH

Panorama
Oct 27 2011
Armenia

“The year of 2011 has been marked for the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic
(NKR, or Artsakh as Armenians were calling it for centuries) with
the 20th anniversary of its independence from the Soviet Union. The
people of Artsakh, despite various endemic challenges, made a choice
for a free and democratic development – something previously unheard
throughout the oppressive Communist era. The freedom-loving people
in Karabakh followed the requirements of then effective (i.e. Soviet)
legislation and norms of international law, and voted for independence
at a nation-wide referendum on December 10, 1991 – right two weeks
before the Soviet Union legally disappeared,” says the American
analytical online publication Foreign Policy Journal in the article
entitled “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic: The First 20 Years of de-facto
Independence.”

Since restoring its independence, note the authors of the article, one
of the toughest challenges for the NKR remains convincing those against
Artsakh’s freedom, and first of all – neighboring Azerbaijan, that
the world has changed since 1991, and that decolonization processes
take place much smoother with the adequate reaction by former members
of a single political-administrative entity. But, unfortunately,
few of former Soviet republics refuse to accept the new realities,
and cherish a partial and selective retention of Stalin’s deeds.

Authors note, that historically and legally, Nagorno-Karabakh or
Artsakh has been one of the ancient Armenian principalities. During
the short period of independence of South Caucasus republics (Armenia,
Georgia and Azerbaijan) in 1918-1920, the League of Nations refused
to recognize newly-created Azerbaijan because of its territorial
claims towards Georgia and Armenia, particularly, claims over
Nagorno-Karabakh, stating that “frontier disputes with neighboring
states did not permit of an exact definition of the boundaries of
Azerbaijan.” “Thus, it is extremely important to underline and keep
in mind that in 1918-1920, international community, particularly
the League of Nations, did not recognize Azerbaijan’s authority over
Nagorno-Karabakh,” writes the Foreign Policy Journal.

After the region’s Sovietization, in 1921, the Bolshevik government,
under the leadership of Joseph Stalin, placed Armenian-populated
Nagorno-Karabakh inside the newly drawn borders of the Soviet
Azerbaijan. As it is said in the publication, when during the era
of perestroika and glasnost declared by Gorbachev the people of
Karabakh sought to legally rejoin Armenia, Azerbaijan responded
with anti-Armenian pogroms in Baku, Sumgayit, Kirovabad, Mingechaur,
total blockade of Nagorno Karabakh, and escalation of the peaceful
process into a full-scale war, which has claimed thousands of lives.

Noteworthy, that in 1991, when Azerbaijan adopted a declaration on
state independence, it proclaimed itself the successor of the 1918-1920
Azerbaijani Democratic Republic, thus, as it’s said in the article,
rejecting the Soviet Azerbaijan’s legal and political heritage,
including Soviet-era authority over the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous
Oblast, because the League of Nations didn’t recognize Azerbaijani
authority over Nagorno Karabakh in the years of 1918-1920 Republic.

ARMENIAN CHURCH TO REDUCE PHILANTHROPY EXPENSES IF TAXED

news.am
Oct 27 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – The fact that the bill on granting tax privileges to the
church was adopted at the first hearings in the parliament proves
respect for the Armenian Church, ruling Prosperous Armenia Party MP
Vardan Bostanjyan said at the press conference on Thursday regarding
the bill on granting taxation for Holy See Echmiadzin.

The MP said that the issue was that local self-governmental bodies
have lack of self-financing. Financial assets are not enough for the
community development. Besides they come from the taxation of land
and property, which does not allow active development. The adoption
of bill means that local self-governmental bodies, which receive
subsidy from state, get deprived of money.

In response, Bishop Arshak Khachatryan stated that taxes for lands,
which belong to the church, are not the major income of the local
communities. Thus, taxes are not much and will not damage the community
budget if Armenian Church will be granted tax privileges.

Besides, if the church pays tax, it will have to reduce one third of
its philanthropic projects.

Armenian News-NEWS.am earlier informed that the bill caused serious
discussions in the national parliament.

ARMENIAN POLICE ENFORCE SECURITY OF GOVERNMENT BUILDING

Vestnik Kavkaza
Oct 27 2011

Entrances to the Armenian government building on the central square
of Yerevan, Republic Square, have been closed off by the police,
News Armenia reports.

Traffic has not been restricted.

Yerevan Deputy Police Chief Robert Melkonyan says that the measures
were taken to facilitate normal operation of the government for the
weekly session on Thursdays.

Traditionally, citizens gather at the government building on Thursdays
and organize protests. People hold posters and attract the attention
of functionaries to their problems, in particular problems with the
army, housing and the environment.

Such security measures will from now on become regular, to allow
state authorities to enter the building without hindrance. Additional
security will then be lifted after the session ends. Melkonyan added
that details on the measures will be posted on the official police
website.

ARMENIAN CHESS PLAYER – LEADER OF THE TOURNAMENT OF 1ST WORLD CHESS GAMES FOR THE DISABLED

ARMENPRESS
OCTOBER 27, 2011
YEREVAN

Armenian chess player Arthur Gevorgov, gathering 3 points out of the
possible 4, leads the tournament of the 1st World Chess Games for the
Disabled together with German Martin Luther. The World Chess Games
for the Disabled are conducted in Dresden, Germany.

Arthur Gevorgov came forth in the staff of the German chess club.

ARMENIAN CIVIL SERVANTS DEMANDS MEDIAN SALARY RISE

/ARKA/
OCTOBER 27, 2011
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, October 27. / ARKA /. Armenian civil servants placed an open
letter to the president and prime minister of the country in Facebook
demanding a basic salary rate of 11,000 drams from 2012 January. To
date the letter has been supported by 1,027 civil servants.

It says under the Sustainable Development Strategy, approved by the
government in 2008, the monthly salary of civil servants in 2011 was
supposed to rise up to 184,000 drams and to 207,8000 drams in 2012.

However, the minimum salary of civil servants is about 90,600 drams
now and the maximum is 371,600 drams with maximum salary being 4
times higher than the minimum.

“According to the National Statistical Service of Armenia, the
subsistence level in the first quarter of 2011 totalled 62,600 AMD,
which is almost twice the official base rate of civil servants salary,”
says the letter.

During a parliament session today a lawmaker from the opposition
Armenian Revolutionary Federation, Artsvik Minasian, asked social
and labor minister Arthur Grigorian to comment on the letter. The
minister said the current budget does not allow to raise salaries
of civic servants. He said the draft budget for 2012 earmarks an 18
billion drams worth benefits package for civic servants.

The median monthly nominal wage in Armenia in September this year
amounted to 114,463 drams, having increased by 7.1% from a year
earlier. Public sector salaries amounted to 93,028 drams, a 9.6%
year-on-year rise and private sector median salary was 138,750 drams,
which was 4.5% higher than in September last year. ($1 – 378.01 AMD).