Author: nina hovnanian

Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Russia
Sept 29 2011

Supervised Peace in South Caucasus: Russia Suggests West Jointly
Ensure Nonrenewal of War in Troubled Region

by Yuriy Roks

Sergey Lavrov expressed Russia’s interest in a stable South Caucasus.

Russia is prepared to become the guarantor of peace in the South
Caucasus and would be grateful if the United States and European Union
[EU] would help in this mission. The statement by Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov during his speech to the Sixth-Sixth Session of
the UN General Assembly elicited mixed reactions in the generally
recognized subjects of the South Caucasus. Georgia responded with
sarcasm, Azerbaijan with understanding but without trying to hide its
dissatisfaction with the Karabakh settlement process, and Armenia with
positive restraint.

The reaction of the South Caucasus states to the statement by the head
of the Russian MID [Foreign Ministry] could serve as a pointed
illustration of Russia’s own position in the South Caucasus. This
“multifacetedness” may explain the challenge to the West to help
Russia be the guarantor of peace and stability in the South Caucasus.
Previously in Russian leaders’ speeches regarding this region we heard
the phrase “zone of our responsibility.”

“Russia firmly intends to undertake all that is necessary in order to
prevent the application of a force scenario and an escalation of
violence in the Caucasus,” Sergei Lavrov said, speaking at a session
of the UN General Assembly in New York. According to him, if there is
an illegal use of force by any of the sides, “Russia is prepared to
take all necessary measures to establish peace in the region.”

Can this statement be interpreted as a warning of the possibility of
deja vu of August 2008 if shooting breaks out somewhere in the South
Caucasus? Apparently so. At the same time, Russia has once again shown
its readiness to be the guarantor of non-use of force agreements
between Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia. “We would welcome it if
the United States and EU [European Union] took on analogous
obligations,” Lavrov said. “In our capacity as guarantor we would be
prepared to take measures to prevent the renewal of violence in the
region and, in the event of illegal use of force by any of the sides,
to achieve the speediest settlement of the situation on the basis of
the current norms of international law.”

In the opinion of Aleksey Malashenko, a member of the Carnegie Moscow
Centre’s research council, Lavrov’s statement was elicited by a
recognition of reality as well as a reluctance to portray Russia as an
empire on the backdrop of Vladimir Putin’s likely return to the
presidency. “And if nothing works with the West in the
Georgia-Abkhazia-South Ossetia triangle, then criticism against Russia
on the relevant issues will die down,” Professor Malashenko told NG
[Nezavisimaya Gazeta].

Tbilisi responded to Lavrov’s statements about Russia’s desire to be
the guarantor of peace in the region with reminders of the losses
Georgia suffered by trusting its northern neighbour. Tbilisi also made
it clear that it has no intention of reaching agreements with “its
autonomous regions”; on the other hand, it is prepared to consider a
scenario for signing an agreement on the non-use of force with Russia
itself. With the participation of the international community. That
is, the West.

The EU showed more interest than Georgia in Lavrov’s proposal. Maya
Kochiyanchich, the press secretary for the EU’s High Representative of
the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, told journalists
that the proposal “touches upon certain aspects of the complicated
situation around the conflict in Georgia that we have to study in more
detail.”

“We will continue to advance additional possibilities for a peaceful
settlement of the Karabakh conflict that have arisen as a result of
Russia’s efforts and mediation. We will continue, within the framework
of the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe]
Minsk Group [MG], together with our partners – France and the United
States – to advance a peaceful solution to the conflict,” Lavrov said,
addressing the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. “Within the framework of
the troika of OSCE Minsk Group cochairs, together with our American
and French partners, we will be advancing a set of measures for
building confidence and strengthening the ceasefire.”

Calling a spade a spade, the Russian foreign minister basically
indicated that the status quo in the Karabakh regard was optimal:
talks under the patronage of the MG OSCE, with a slight increase in
pressure first on one side of the conflict, then on the other, with
refusals to sign the proposed documents first by one side, then by the
other. This might also suit Yerevan. But not Baku.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov, speaking from the same
podium, listed the conditions that might facilitate progress in a
settlement. He did not say anything new in enumerating their demands,
which the Armenian side would not accept without the recognition of
Nagornyy Karabakh’s independence: the withdrawal of Armenian armed
forces, the return of refugees, and “the creation of conditions for
peaceful coexistence by Azerbaijanis and Armenians in the region of
the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict within the context of territorial
integrity.” “Azerbaijan still maintains its interest, motivation, and
patience in this very difficult and sensitive negotiations process. .
. . We believe that the international community will convince the
Armenian side. . . . In turn, we are prepared to guarantee a high
level of self-governance for this region within the Republic of
Azerbaijan,” Mammadyarov stated. Heard in the foreign minister’s
intonations were clear notes of disappointment at the years-long, but
fruitless talks. His deputy, Halaf Halafov, spoke out more caustically
on this subject during this time at a meeting in Baku with a
delegation from Argentina’s parliament: “The peace talks are not
yielding results due to the unreadiness of the Armenian leadership to
liberate the occupied territories.” There is probably no point in
clarifying what follows from such an “ingenuous” statement given the
condition of Azerbaijan’s unwillingness to lose the NKR [Republic of
Nagornyy Karabakh]. From this standpoint, the statement about Russia’s
readiness to be the guarantor of peace might bother Baku and
simultaneously have a sedative effect on the Armenian side.

Yerevan has emphasized yet again that compromise assumes mutual
concessions, but Azerbaijan has only demands and ephemeral promises
“one day to hold a referendum on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh,” “to
ensure democratic standards and civil freedoms for the Karabakhs,” and
so on. “It is odd hearing about this from the leaders of a country
that has been criticized more than once in PACE [Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe] for its regression in democratic
processes,” Naira Zograbyan, chair of the Armenian parliament’s
permanent commission on Euro integration issues. “Azerbaijan has
passed amendments to the Constitution revoking the limit on the
president to two terms. In a country . . . where life-long rule is
sanctioned, it is useless to speak of democracy,” she stated.

“Of course, Mr Lavrov’s words cannot be interpreted with 100 per cent
certainty. A joint approach is possible in the projection on the
Karabakh problem if Russia, the United States, and the EU, say, with
the nonopposition of Turkey, create conditions in line with reality
and propose a package agreement to Yerevan and Baku as the sole path
for settling the conflict. My position on this issue is well known:
recognize NKR sovereignty, hand the territory around Karabakh, except
Lachinskiy Rayon, over to Azerbaijan, and return the refugees,” State
Duma Deputy Konstantin Zatulin, who is the director of the Institute
for CIS [Commonwealth of Independent States] Countries, told NG.
According to him, the positions of Russia and the West on the Karabakh
conflict are close enough. “If Lavrov had in mind that Russia could
reach an agreement with the West on all South Caucasus issues, then I
do not believe that. We have a completely different vision of the
situation in Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia,” Zatulin told NG.

[translated from Russian]

Robert Kocharyan will come back if he feels crisis at political arena,
Iskandaryan says

arminfo
Saturday, October 1, 17:54

Robert Kocharyan will come back if he feels crisis at the political
arena, director of the “Caucasus” institute, Aleksandr Iskandaryan
said at today’s
press-conference.

He also added that the election campaign started yesterday and the
political situation is becoming more tense in the country. Crisis
between different political forces may happen within the frames of
this tension, he said. “The election campaign is a fight between
electorates. And if Kocharyan feels that he can succeed on this field,
in that case he will join the politics”, – Iskandaryan said.

For his part, director of the Armenian office of the CIS Institute
Aleksandr Markarov added that at present the same has been taking
place in the country as in 2007 after returning of Levon Ter-Petrosyan
to the big politics. He said that rallies will become more active
taking into account the election campaign.

Azerbaijan to back Turkey in Israeli-Turkish conflict

October 1, 2011 – 14:25 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – The Turkish-Israeli conflict is explained by
Turkey’s aspiration to expand its influence over the countries once a
part of the Ottoman Empire, according to an Armenian expert.

`Turkey is not an ordinary country. Being militaristic and aggressive,
it now tries to make use of the weakened Arab world,’ Levon Shirinyan
told a news conference in Yerevan.

As to Azerbaijan, he said, it’s a country that originated as a result
of a bargain between Turkey and Soviet Russia. `Azerbaijan is a Turkic
state which forms a kind of confederation together with Turkey and
Northern Cyprus. It can’t but support Turkey or fall under Russia’s
influence again, thus displeasing the United States,’ the expert said.

RA PRESIDENT PARTICIPATES IN EU EASTERN PARTNERSHIP SUMMIT

ARMENPRESS
17:19, 30 September, 2011

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, who is Warsaw on a working visit,
participated today in EU Eastern Partnership Summit. Presidential
press service told Armenpress. In his address at the summit Serzh
Sargsyan said that the birth of the Eastern Partnership was really
the demand of time. “It gave a new breath and opened new perspectives
for the relations of the European Union and Eastern Partnership. Now,
two years later after the launch of the initiative, it is necessary
to sum up the progress and indicate the tasks for future. Referring
to these issues within the summit reflects the attitude toward the
Eastern Partnership and reconfirms the political commitment of pushing
it forward.

The challenges in our non-stop world concern both the European
Union and countries of Eastern Partnership, because as a result
of our cooperation the interconnection is becoming more and more
tangible. We attach high importance to “more support – more reforms”
principle worked out as a result of reconsideration of the European
neighborhood policy.

Armenia registers the progress in negotiations over the Association
Agreement with gratification. We aim to maintain and continue such
tempo of the progress and now we undertake steps for implementation of
relevant measures in the direction of creating a deep and comprehensive
free trade zone with the European Union. We look upon this process
as an additional impetus of pushing forward the basic institutional
and structural reforms in Armenia,” Serzh Sargsyan said.

SOUTH CORRIDOR MUST NOT FEED NEW WAR – ARMENIAN PRESIDENT

Tert.am
19:15 30.09.11

The policy of the European Union, as a supporter of peace and security
in the South Caucasus, must promote the region’s harmonious development
and, therefore, maintain the balance, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
stated at the EU Eastern Partnership Summit in Warsaw.

Armenia understands the need for diverse sources of supply for the
energy security of Europe and EU member-states. On the other hand,
Armenia reserves the right to expect understanding of its concerns
over its national security, stability and harmonious development
problems in the region, the Armenian leader said.

President Serzh Sargsyan stressed that Armenia is for the region’s
involvement in European projects, which will strengthen the ties
between the South Caucasus and EU.

However, the implementation of such projects should not allow any
state to gain advantage especially when the capital is used to the
detriment of regional security. The Armenian leader expressed hope
that the EU is well aware of the fragile situation in the region.

The South corridor must not be allowed to feed a new war, Serzh
Sargsyan said.

YEREVAN PHYSICS INSTITUTE TO TURN INTO NUCLEAR MEDICINE CENTER

arminfo
Friday, September 30, 14:49

The employees of the National Scientific Laboratory after Alikhanyan
(Yerevan Physics Institute) are against its reorganizing into a
fund and creation of Nuclear Medicine Centre on its basis to fight
oncological diseases, Director of Yerevan Physics Institute, Hamlet
Lazarian, told journalists today. He also added that all the decisions
on the issue are adopted by the government without taking into account
the viewpoints of the leadership and workers of the institute.

For his part, an employee of the Physics Institute, Dr. Ruben
Lazarian added that the Yerevan Physics Institute is one of
the strongest scientific institutes of Armenia. “In all over the
world such institutes are fully financed from the budget, but after
reorganization we shall turn into a commercial structure and will
not be a state scientific center any more”, – Ruben Lazarian said.

On 1 september 2011 the Armenian government adopted a decision to
reorganize the Yerevan Physics Institute into a fund. The decision
on establishment of a Nuclear Medicine Center on the basis of the
Yerevan Physics Institute was adopted by the Armenian government on
19 February 2009.

AVAKIAN: ARMENIA – “ONE WORLD” SLACERY

Armenia – “One World” Slavery
Friday, 30 September 2011 00:00

Ardavast Avakian, Boca Raton, Florida, U.S.A.

Armenia’s foreign debt for April 1, 2011 reached USD 3.382 billion.

Armenia owes the World Bank USD 1.305 billion which is 38.6 % of its
entire foreign debt. Armenia also owes to the different organizations
affiliated to the World Bank USD 1.19 billion and these figures show
that more than two thirds (2/3) of Armenia’s debt is to the World
Bank and its affiliated bodies.

Apart from World Bank, Armenia owes money to EBRD, OPEC, Asian
Development Bank, the International Foundation for Agriculture
Development, IMF and others. Armenia also owes Russia, Japan, Germany,
USA, and France.

Economic genocide has been committed against Armenia since the
declaration of its sovereignty from the Soviet system. The Application
of the International Financial Institutions (IFI) structural adjustment
programs that have been put in place favor the internationalism of
macro-economic policy under the direct control of the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

The IMF tightly monitors and provides resources for the reconstructing
of the Central Bank. This means that the IMF rather than the Armenian
Government controls money creation, and so, becomes the vehicle able
to paralyze the financing of real economic development. Incapable of
using domestic monetary policy to mobilize its internal resources,
the country becomes increasingly dependent on international sources
of funding which has the added consequence of increasing the level
of external indebtedness.

The Nobel Prize winner in economics, Joseph Stiglitz, was the chief
economist of the World Bank until 1999.  He stated that, “National
leaders do not usually object to the sell off of state industries.

Instead, they use World Bank demands to silence local critics. The
10 percent commissions paid to local ministers seem to satisfy their
dreams of wealth. All they do is shave a few million off the price and
wire it to a Swiss bank account. The U.S. Government knows this.” Of
course, as long as the leaders of the country go along with the loan
agreements, they will finance their re-elections.

To put it simply:  Armenia’s leaders must sell assets of the nation
in order to pay (only the interest) on the money they are borrowing
for running the government. It is under these conditions that Armenia
is not able to build its economy based upon its natural creativeness.

For 65 years Armenia did not have total control of its destiny under
the Soviet system. Now, after so-called freedom of over 20 years,
the International Financial Institutions (IFI) are in control
of its destiny. The only difference now, is that the population
is forced to leave the country, making it more vulnerable for
extinguishing the Armenian nation. That, of course, is the intent
of the internationalists. During the last years of the Soviet Union
there were slightly more than four million Armenians, and now, there
exists only about two million. The remaining populace is influenced
and contaminated by external social influences from the west, which
slowly affects the character of the nation. “One World Government” 
is their goal.  Nationalism is their only impediment.

Today, the Armenian government has borrowed such huge amounts of funds
from “one-world” banks that they will never be able to pay them back.

The reason the international banks are anxious to loan funds, is that
they can dictate to Armenia’s government its future and destiny. At
some point, very soon, the constitution of Armenia should state that
the government is forbidden to pay interest on foreign borrowed money.

There should not be another private entity such as the “Armenian
Central Bank,” which has tentacles with international world banks. The
Armenian Government should immediately begin printing their own money
and regulating its value relative to gold.  Selling control of their
gold mines was a national criminal act.  If there is any source of
gold left, they should immediately reclaim it with a parliamentary
authoritative edict stating, “that no mined gold can leave the
country.”  It should be stored in vaults and under security of
the army.

It is most difficult for a small nation such as Armenia to withstand
one-world external forces that are harmful to its existence.  One of
the predominant methods used to weaken Armenia is to eliminate its
sense of nationalism.  This is done by contaminating the nation’s
culture, the usage of money to create greed of its leaders, stagnate
its economy in order to depopulate the nation, destroy its Christian
religion by the introduction of cults, atheism, new age movements,
world religion, homosexuality and immorality.

At this time it would be most wise and prudent for the Armenian
Parliament (with free, total  authority) to decide printing its
own currency for circulation to the populace, while concurrently
reducing the burden of debt created by borrowing from the thievery
of international banking institutions.

Armenia must be the master of its own wealth.

WEAPONS SALE TO ARMENIA WAS RIGHT AND LEGAL, SAYS MOLDOVAN MINISTER

Tert.am
13:17 30.09.11

Moldovan Defense Minister Vitaly Marinutsa has said his country’s
weapon sale with Armenia was right and legal.

Commenting on the Azerbaijan’s statement characterizing the deal wrong,
the Moldovan official said he disagreed to such position.

Moldovan Ambassador to Azerbaijan Igor Boglu said recently that a
secret deal between the employees of the Moldovan General Staff and
Yerevan would not seriously harm the Azerbaijani-Moldovan relations.

“Kiev is conducting an investigation into the secret weapons sale,”
the diplomat said.

Citing the Moldovan media, the Azerbaijani news outlets reported
earlier that Molvoa’s president had signed a decree to fire the head
of the country’s General Staff, Yuri Domich.

It came after the Moldovan media said the country had sold 60 tons of
outdated weaponry to Armenia. The Moldovan defense minister confirmed
fact while the Armenian side denied the the reports.

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT TO BE HAPPY ABOUT VLADIMIR PUTIN’S RETURN – MOSKOVSKIYE NOVOSTI

Tert.am
12:28 30.09.11

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan is perhaps the only one of the CIS
leaders Vladmir Putin’s return to the Kremlin as president will make
glad, writes the Moskovskiye Novosti daily, referring to the latest
domestic political developments in Russia.

“Two bears cannot share one den. If we believe the Wikileaks, it was
a comment on the Russian tandem’s activities Azerbaijani President
Ilham Aliyev made in talking to US diplomats several years ago. The
CIS leaders are still refraining from showing the public their reaction
to the ‘castle’ within the tandem, which is quite reasonable on their
part. The presidential election is Russia is to be held in almost six
months. Judging by the excitement within the Russian Establishment,
we can expect new surprises.

“Nevertheless, considering the confidence, few can call into question,
that Vladimir Putin will return to the Kremlin as ‘new old president’,
Armenian President Serzh Sagsyan is perhaps the only one of the CIS
leaders that can feel glad about it. Not that Yerevan has failed to
reap any considerable dividends in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process
from Dmitri Medvedev’s presidency. It has not been a ‘gift’ for Baku
either. The point is that, over recent years, the Armenian leadership
has been able to build up such relations with Moscow that are hardly
dependent on the Kremlin master’s name. On the other hand, Yerevan must
be in the habit of looking for Putin and his team,” the daily writes.

IT’S TIME TO RESIGN
Arman Galoyan

Lragir.am News

11:32:17 – 30/09/2011

Interview with Zoya Tadevosyan, Ph.D., economist, member of the
Armenian National Congress

Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan mentioned in the meeting of government
after the approval of the state budget 2012 that we will get additional
finance from the IMF, World Bank and the EU on the condition that we
implement our programs. Is the external debt growing?

If the country is reduced to a situation when we have to borrow money
from international loan organizations to implement social programs,
it is time for the government to resign. It means that we are dealing
with a dead economic body, while the payment of pensions and benefits
at the expense of increasing the external debt will crash hope of
its reanimation. The primary steps which were to be taken by the
government was the reduction of the level of percentage, curbing
inflation, regulation of the exchange rate to the level enabling a
favorable climate for investments and making products made in Armenia
competitive. It was necessary to cut imports, juxtaposing it with the
policy of encouraging exports. I say “was” because nothing has been
done, and it is impossible to pay pensions and benefits once or twice
on foreign money and solve long-term issues. Moreover, recently the
French prime minister commended diversification of our economy. Let
alone the absurd that it is impossible to diversify the economy in
5 or 6 months. However, if we assume that it is possible, where are
the effects of diversification? Can you see growth of income, budget
revenues? Now we have two controversial “good news”. How about truth?

The truth is that the consequences of empty words are destructive.

In the meeting of government, the chief of the State Revenue Committee
Gagik Khachatryan announced: “No such growth of tax revenues has
ever been estimated in the history of Armenia, especially in crisis
periods. We have very serious doubts that these taxes will be
collected.” How shall we understand this?

If the country’s economic situation is getting worse, taxes rise to
their upper limit, tax pressure increases. This situation is typical
of a crisis period. So, everything is worse than one can imagine.

During a financial crisis, the income of manufacturers and consumers
drops, the rate of unemployment drops, tax basis shrinks. What is
left to do? Increase tax pressure what is done.

In that case, why does Gagik Khachatryan make such a statement? Do
they confess that they are unable to do that or what?

Of course, they are. Nothing else can be concerned. I say the
economic body is dead, collecting taxes from a dead body is the same
as looting. Meanwhile, to ensure tax collections, the oligarchs must
pay the taxes, or in other words, they must pay taxes themselves.