Author: nina hovnanian

TENDANCES INFLATIONNISTES EN ARMENIE

Après plusieurs annees consecutives de baisse, l’inflation
repartirait-elle a la hausse en Armenie ? C’est la question que
se posent les experts alors que les prix a la consummation ont
marque une nette tendance a la hausse au cours des derniers mois,
faisant douter de la capacite du gouvernement a tenir son engagement
a maîtriser l’inflation a un taux maximum de 5,5 % cette annee. Le
Service national des statistiques (NSS) a fait savoir vendredi 28 juin
que le taux d’inflation etait passe 5,2 % en mai a 6,5 % en juin,
une augmentation attribuee principalement a la hausse du prix des
denrees alimentaires, qui ont augmente de 9 % en un an.

Selon les chiffres fournis par le NSS, le prix de certains de ces
produits, comme les fruits et les legumes, ont enregistre une hausse
brutale de 18 % en juin, qui serait due aux mauvaises conditions
climatiques endurees par les agriculteurs. Ceux-ci beneficiaient d’un
climat nettement plus favorable en 2012, ce qui explique en partie que
l’inflation soit tombee l’an dernier a un taux de 2,6 %, le plus bas
enregistre depuis 2005. Les annees 2010 et 2011 avaient ete egalement
marquees par un taux d’inflation très bas. Le gouvernement armenienet
la Banque centrale avaient annonce que l’inflation pourrait etre
maîtrisee en 2013 dans une fourchette comprise entre 2,5 % et 5,5%,
le taux de 4 % etant plus probable. Pourtant, de telles previsions
semblent devoir etre remises en cause après l’augmentation de 50 %
des tariffs du gaz naturel importe de Russie, qui a ete annoncee en
juin dernier.

Cette hausse brutale a conduit les operateurs armeniens a augmenter
considerablement le montant de la facture du gaz et de l’electricite
des foyers armeniens. Cette augmentation devrait etre appliquee dès
le debut du mois d’août, laissant redouter un renforcement de la
tendance inflationniste en Armenie. Artur Javadian, le gouverneur
de la Banque centrale, avait laisse entendre debut juin que cette
augmentation pourrait se traduire par une hausse de deux points du
taux annuel de l’inflation.

mardi 2 juillet 2013, Gari ©armenews.com

LA TURQUIE DENONCE LE ROLE DU LOBBY JUIF DANS LES MANIFESTATIONS ANTIGOUVERNEMENTALES

ANKARA, 02 juil 2013 (AFP) – Le vice-Premier ministre turc Besir Atalay
a accuse la “diaspora juive” d’avoir participe a l’organisation des
manifestations contre le regime islamo-conservateur turc, a rapporte
mardi la presse turque. “Les incidents du parc Gezi (a Istanbul)
(…) ont ete orchestres par la diaspora juive, qui a ete active dans
ce domaine”, a dit M. Atalay cite par le quotidien Hurriyet.

M. Atalay a egalement mis en cause la presse internationale et des
“forces etrangères”, dont il n’a pas detaille la composition, pour
avoir participe a la “destabilisation” de la Turquie lors de la fronde
qui a secoue pendant plus de trois semaines la Turquie.

“La Turquie n’est plus ce qu’elle etait auparavant”, a-t-il toutefois
souligne, “tout le monde est au courant de ce qui se passe”. Ces
dernières semaines, le Premier ministre Recep Tayyip Erdogan a, lui,
pointe du doigt la responsabilite d’un “lobby financier” ou d’un “lobby
des taux d’interet”, accuse d’avoir tire profit de la contestation en
Turquie, un pays emergent et une destination importante des capitaux
etrangers.

Plus de 2,5 millions de personnes sont descendues dans la rue dans
près de 80 villes du pays pendant les trois semaines qui ont suivi
le 31 mai, selon des estimations de la police revelees dans la presse.

Ces manifestations dirigees contre M. Erdogan, accuse de derive
autoritaire et de vouloir “islamiser” la societe turque, ont coute
la vie a quatre personnes -trois manifestants et un policier- et en
ont blesse près de 8.000 autres, selon l’Association des medecins.

mardi 2 juillet 2013, Ara ©armenews.com

A “CONCEALMENT-REVISIONIST” DIALOGUE IS NECESSARILY DOOMED TO FAILURE

Hilda Tchoboian

Regional councillor of Rhône-Alpes (France)
Born in Aleppo, Syria, Hilda Tchoboian studied in France. In 1978, she
became head of the Armenian Culture House in Decines (France) until
2010. She works in favor of the recognition of the Armenian genocide
by international organizations (UN, European Parliament). President
of the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy based
in Brussels from 2002 to 2011, she has worked as a consultant for
the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The Dialogue between Turks and Armenians has undoubtedly been one of
the defining features of the relationships btween the two peoples
in the last years, ushering a change in the nature and status of
these relations. However, although initiatives in this field may
seem spontaneous, a closer look at the dominant rhetoric of that
“dialogue” and at the course of Turkish-Armenian relations in the
last ten years clearly shows a planned and controlled process by
the Turkish government, who successfully delegated to the civil
society the handling of an extremely embarrassing issue which has been
plaguing Turkey’s relations with Western countries for two decades and,
more annoyingly, is hindering its entry into the European Union. The
dialogue process was thus implemented to defuse the legitimate claims
to the recognition of the genocide and to reparations stated by the
Armenian community in the Diaspora as well as in Armenia. On the
eve of each international decision affecting its national interests,
Turkey would launch a new dialogue initiative.

In the end, since its inception, the Turkish-Armenian dialogue has
nurtured a new Turkish strategy of dodging the Armenian genocide
issue while not questioning revisionism as a structured, supported
and geographically disseminated State policy.

On the Armenian side, the motives driving proponents of dialogue do
not stem out of political reflection. This dialogue is experienced as
an expression of humane feelings. Some weariness can also be noted
in the face of the deadlock created by Turkish revisionism, with an
occasional search for new ways to get rid of a psychological burden.

On the other hand, many instances suggest that some Turkish
“Dialoguists” view dialogue with Armenians as a form a negotiation, a
transaction which can only operate through concessions imposed equally
on both sides. Everyone knows that a transaction is designed to reach
a win/win solution, which characterizes every successful negotiation.

Therefore, in order to negotiate, you have to respect the dignity
and beliefs of the Turkish speaker by legitimizing the revisionist
views which are part of his education. (On this subject, see the
collaborative work by Ahmed Insel and Michel Marian, “Dialogue on an
Armenian Taboo,” reviewing the emblematic case of writer Ahmed Insel,
a brilliant, media-loved, French-speaking Turkish intellectual, who
nevertheless tries to explain his refusal of the word “genocide” as
a result of the education he received in a Kemalist and nationalistic
family.)

If, for some Dialoguists, the underlying goal is to find a common
ground about the very reality of genocide, we understand the reason
behind the rejection of the term “genocide” and its replacement by
far-fetched phrases such as “the G word”. The principle is to replace
public recognition by phrases belonging to the private sphere: the
phrasing of the apology campaign to Armenians is a case in point:
“My conscience cannot accept that we should remain indifferent to the
Great Catastrophe that Ottoman Armenians have undergone in 1915, and
that it should be negated. I reject this injustice and, as for me,
share the feelings and sorrow of my Armenian sisters and brothers,
and ask them for forgiveness.”

There is no denying the courage of those who initiated this
campaign, given the well-known unwholesome atmosphere, in Turkey,
of widespread racism and violence against the Armenians. However,
the words underlined above attest to a deliberate will to eliminate
the genocide from the public and political field, which makes the
whole text incomprehensible when it comes to asking for forgiveness.

Some questions thus remain unanswered:

– Who must ask forgiveness for a State crime?

– Who is entitled to forgive in the case of a genocidal crime?

As for forgiveness itself, it is a very old concept. If gestures of
reconciliation by which the victim stops wanting to get revenge must
be called forgiveness, they are associated everywhere to an accepted
“blood price.” One should distinguish the “forgiveness-deal” from the
“forgiveness-renouncement,” for the offender who has admitted to his
offence and repents.

Forgiveness is a gift which liberates from a past offence. It frees the
future from the burden of the past. Therefore, two Western traditions
of forgiveness contradict each other:

– On the one hand, you can only forgive if the offender confesses,
asks for forgiveness, repents, and therefore changes. But then,
someone who exposes himself in this way is somehow already another
person. It is thus not the offender himself who is being forgiven.

– On the other hand, forgiveness is granted as a free and generous
gesture, an ultimate pardon, without an expected trade-off or
compensation, without repentance or requested forgiveness. It is
then granted to the offender as an offender. It is forgiveness at
its purest.

What is therefore the status of asking for forgiveness while carefully
avoiding to name the guilty and the object to be forgiven?

Without these precisions clarifying and qualifying the action, this
request cannot fit in any of the two categories offered by philosophers
of forgiveness:

– The offender begs his victim for forgiveness and proves that he
has changed, or

– Forgiveness is bestowed freely by the victim.

Ironically, the Armenians thanking Turkish authors are the ones who
display all the traits of unilateral forgiveness, expecting nothing
in return, in front of an absence of genuine request for forgiveness.

Genesis: It started in 2001. After a string of successes obtained
in 2000 by the Armenian Diaspora- recognition by the French Senate,
the Italian Parliament and the Vatican; First Report on Turkey by
the European Parliament asking the Grand National Assembly of Turkey
to recognize the genocide; a bill nearly submitted to the vote of
American Congress until it was opposed by President Clinton – the
French Foreign Affairs (seemingly with the help of American advisers)
suggested a new approach to the Turkish government to placate the
growing demand for Armenian Genocide recognition: dialogue.

Financed by the American State Department, presided by David Phillips,
the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) was born,
bringing together former diplomats, scholars and personalities from
Turkey, Armenia and the Armenian Diaspora. The Commission recommended
exchanges between the two civil societies in the fields of the media,
culture, economy, education, partnership between Armenian and Turkish
women and between Armenian and Turkish leaders; the only banned theme
was the Armenian genocide.

In TARC, as in the 2008 Campaign for Forgiveness, a few side statements
surrounding the initiatives confirmed the Machiavellian view on the
Turkish part.

As former Turkish diplomat Ozdem Sanberk put it about TARC:

“As long as we keep up talks with Armenians, the question of genocide
will never appear on the agenda of the American Congress.”

And Baskin Oran about the plea for forgiveness: “The Prime Minister
should pray for our campaign. Parliaments throughout the world were
passing resolutions. Now they will stop. The Diaspora mellowed.

International media are starting not to use the word genocide.”

(Milliyet 19th December 2008). What is more, several Turkish
members of TARC resigned when, upon request by Armenian members, the
InternationalCenter for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) examined whether
the 1948 Convention was applicable to the genocide of Armenians.

In conclusion, if dialogue is to be given the meaning of
reconciliation, the Turkish-Armenian dialogue is missing at least
two essential elements which are found in all the previous cases of
reconciliation processes in the world – from South Africa to Argentina,
Peru, Australia and Togo: Truth/Recognition and Justice/Reparation.

Today, a “concealment-revisionist” dialogue, exploited for the best
strategic interests of the Turkish state, is necessarily doomed
to failure. Even if the road towards recognition is long, Turkish
intellectuals should commit to following it, in the wake of the likes
of Zarakolu, Saït Cetin and Dogan Ozguden, who take great risks,
but whose quest for justice inspires trust.

A NEW REDISTRIBUTION OF OLIGARCHIC OWNERSHIP IN ARMENIA?

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
July 1 2013

1 July 2013 – 11:28am

David Stepanyan, Yerevan, exclusively to VK

The report on the costs of the state budget in 2012 presented on
June 13 by the Control Chamber (CC) of Armenia in the parliament
was the cause of a government scandal. Starting the report, the head
of the Communist Party Ishkhan Zakarian said that in many areas the
situation from year to year remains unchanged, highlighting egregious
cases of embezzlement of public funds in the fields of urban planning
and public procurement. The apogee of the speech by Zakarian was his
assertion that as much as 70% of the state budget is at risk…

After this report the issue of sending to the Prosecutor General
materials relating to the violations documented in the report of the CC
2012 was the subject of extensive discussion and requirements of MPs,
NGOs and human rights activists to send to the General Prosecutor’s
Office under the criminal law violations in the areas of urban
development and road construction.

It is noteworthy that the Zakarian has not yet addressed to the
Prosecutor General in connection with the identified numerous
violations of his department. Meanwhile, under the relevant article of
the law, CC, as an independent government agency, may, on behalf of
the Republic of Armenia, address the court as plaintiff or defendant
and can send to the Prosecutor General’s Office protocols and reports
produced in the course of supervision, if there is a suspicion of
criminal acts.

Given the lack of relevant application to the Prosecutor General after
12 days following the report by Zakarian, there are strong doubts
about the impartiality of CC’s actions, which clearly serves a tool
in the hands of the ruling party. Suspecting the opposition of this is
clearly not reasonable, given that the latter is highly attenuated and
practically pushed out of the political process. Under the conditions
of existence of the nominal opposition the motivation of actions
of the CC head should be sought only within the framework of the
struggle within the ruling elite. At the same time, paradoxically, the
weakness of the opposition, in turn, weakened the power of vigilance,
instilling it a false sense of permissiveness.

The fact that the content of the report was in the hands of the prime
minister and became the subject of the next meeting of the government
proves that this issue is painful for the current cabinet. Tigran
Sarkisyan has said that he is personally very interested in the
immediate submission to the law enforcement authorities of all of the
facts revealed by the Control Chamber. However, Sarkisyan expressed
his opposition to the “excess of CC’s powers and its political
assessments.” In his opinion, the CC has no right to make political
statements, that, he says, is solely the function of the National
Assembly and the executive branch.

It is obvious that by questioning the efficiency of spending public
funds, the head of CC stepped on Sarkisian’s toes, raising doubts about
the effectiveness of his cabinet, which has already become a political
assessment, not to mention its possible political consequences. As a
result, the prime minister attributed Zakarian’s statement on exposure
to risks of corruption of 70% of the state budget “to every member
of the government in the audience,” instructing that no charge will
be left unanswered.

It is noteworthy that after listening to the latest news from
Ishkhan Zakarian, Parliament Speaker Hovik Abrahamyan invited to
send immediately all the abuses identified by CC to the General
Prosecutor’s Office. Abrahamyan also asked the Prime Minister to
dismiss “all those who rob and devour the state budget”, however,
not agreeing with the fact that there is a systematic robbery.

The Republican Speaker was also incredibly surprised to hear about the
many abuses uncovered by CC, assuring the public that the head of the
Republican Party, President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, offering the
position to someone, “does not call them by taking this position to
plunder the people’s money”. “I’m surprised, because we do not have
an agreement to occupy the post of the minister or the governor and
looting”, Abrahamyan said.

Thus, the issues relating to this latest dark history are numerous,
and first of all to the debunker and bribery fighter Ishkhan Zakarian
who over the past 9 months built a mansion costing millions of
dollars. In reality, the report of the Control Chamber displays a
map of economic crimes in Armenia, which allows to collect dossiers,
including on millionaires sitting in parliament.

The wondering Abrahamyan himself in 20 years of being in public office
has become one of the largest property owners in Armenia. He owns
thousands of acres of orchards and vineyards in the Ararat region,
processors, large financial assets. And this list can be extended
indefinitely. As a result, Armenia can be considered a classic modern
country where 99% of the proceeds are disposed among only 1% of the
population, while the remaining 99% live on loans, from paycheck to
paycheck, at the mercy of the banks and the wealthy employers.

In this sense, it is noteworthy that until now protesters in the
Armenian political demands put forward only demands for change of
government and the rule of tyranny. In this case, the root of the
problem remained on the sidelines, although it is more than obvious
that the usurpation of power in Armenia was made possible precisely
by the unjust distribution of national wealth. And just today, the
public openly wondered main question – how the current government
got public assets previously owned by the whole of society? Taron
Margaryan, Ruben Hayrapetyan, Vardan Ayvazyan, Prime Minister Tigran
Sarkisyan are forced to report how they earned their millions. And
the statement by Ishkhan Zakarian that 70% of the Armenian budget
are in the area of corruption risk is just the tip of the iceberg of
contradictions in this pyramid.

And the main conclusion is on the surface: another redistribution of
property will come to Armenia when the oligarchs who do not manage to
“prove their rights” have to give up part of their loot in favor of
… the other oligarchs. Given the amorphous nature of opposition and
the public, expecting the invoice to all oligarchs and demands for the
nationalization of illegally captured national assets is not necessary.

LUKASHENKO SENDS BIRTHDAY GREETINGS TO SERZH SARGSYAN

Belarusian Telegraph News, Belarus
July 1 2013

01.07.2013 10:45

MINSK, 1 July (BelTA) – Belarus’ President Alexander Lukashenko has
sent birthday greetings to President Serzh Sargsyan of the Republic
of Armenia, BelTA learnt from the presidential press service.

“I recollect our recent meeting in Yerevan with true warmth. It was
a convincing evidence of the friendly Belarusian-Armenian relations
based on the principles of mutually beneficial cooperation,” the
message of congratulations reads.

TATEV TOURIST COMPLEX TO OFFER BALLOON AND BIKE RENTALS

Monday, July 1st, 2013

The Gates of Tatev tourism area provides services for visitors to
the medieval monastery.

YEREVAN (Arka)-The Tatev Monastery tourism area in Armenia’s southern
province of Syunik, named Gates of Tatev, has extended the range of
its services, now offering rentals for mountain bikes and hot air
balloons, rock climbing, a planetarium, a visual show, audio guides,
and new stalls with souvenirs, Vahan Meliksetyan, head of the Wings of
Tatev tramway company, said today during a meeting with representatives
of the tourism industry.

Meliketyan said the updated website for Gates of Tatev will provide
detailed information about the services. It will also allow online
booking of services.

According to information posted on the Wings of Tatev website,
tourists who come to Tatev without a guide may rent a video guide in
five languages: English, Armenian, German, Russian and French.

Portable devices with audio clips tied to the map will enable tourists
to navigate on the terrain independently. Tourists will also have an
opportunity to climb down the serpentine road to the river Vorotan
to explore the old village in the valley.

Stretching 3.5 miles above the Vorotan gorge, the Wings of Tatev
tramway is the longest in the world.

Gates of Tatev is located 250 km south of Yerevan. It boasts the
world’s longest aerial tramway, built to transport visitors to
the Medieval Monastery of Tatev. The 5.7 kilometer-long aerial
tramway transports visitors from the village of Halidzor across the
Vorotan gorge to the village of Tatev, within walking distance of
the monastery, allowing tourists and visitors to bypass a 90-minute
drive on a road in and out of the Vorotan River Gorge. The cable
car travels at a speed of 37 kilometers per hour (23 miles per hour)
and a one-way journey takes 11 minutes. At its highest point over the
gorge, the car travels 320 meters (1,056 feet) above ground level. It
has two cabins, each capable of carrying up to 25 passengers.

The cable car is part of a $45 million-dollar public-private effort
to develop tourism at Tatev and in the overall region of Syunik.

The new Wings of Tatev website will launch in September. It will
provide an opportunity to book tickets on-line.

The 100,000th visitor visited Wings of Tatev last year. This year,
the tramway is preparing to welcome its 150,000th visitor.

FOREIGN MEDIA PORTRAYALS OF THE CONFLICT IN SYRIA ARE DANGEROUSLY INACCURATE

World View: It is naive not to accept that both sides are capable of
manipulating the facts to serve their own interests

By Patrick Cockburn

June 30, 2013 “Information Clearing House – “The Independent”—
Every time I come to Syria I am struck by how different the situation
is on the ground from the way it is pictured in the outside world. The
foreign media reporting of the Syrian conflict is surely as inaccurate
and misleading as anything we have seen since the start of the First
World War. I can’t think of any other war or crisis I have covered
in which propagandistic, biased or second-hand sources have been so
readily accepted by journalists as providers of objective facts.

A result of these distortions is that politicians and casual newspaper
or television viewers alike have never had a clear idea over the
last two years of what is happening inside Syria. Worse, long-term
plans are based on these misconceptions. A report on Syria published
last week by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group says that
“once confident of swift victory, the opposition’s foreign allies
shifted to a paradigm dangerously divorced from reality”.

Slogans replace policies: the rebels are pictured as white hats and the
government supporters as black hats; given more weapons, the opposition
can supposedly win a decisive victory; put under enough military
pressure, President Bashar al-Assad will agree to negotiations for
which a pre-condition is capitulation by his side in the conflict. One
of the many drawbacks of the demonising rhetoric indulged in by the
incoming US National Security Adviser Susan Rice, and William Hague,
is that it rules out serious negotiations and compromise with the
powers-that-be in Damascus. And since Assad controls most of Syria,
Rice and Hague have devised a recipe for endless war while pretending
humanitarian concern for the Syrian people.

It is difficult to prove the truth or falsehood of any generalisation
about Syria. But, going by my experience this month travelling in
central Syria between Damascus, Homs and the Mediterranean coast,
it is possible to show how far media reports differ markedly what is
really happening. Only by understanding and dealing with the actual
balance of forces on the ground can any progress be made towards a
cessation of violence.

On Tuesday I travelled to Tal Kalakh, a town of 55,000 people just
north of the border with Lebanon, which was once an opposition
bastion. Three days previously, government troops had taken over
the town and 39 Free Syrian Army (FSA) leaders had laid down their
weapons. Talking to Syrian army commanders, an FSA defector and local
people, it was evident there was no straight switch from war to peace.

It was rather that there had been a series of truces and ceasefires
arranged by leading citizens of Tal Kalakh over the previous year.

But at the very time I was in the town, Al Jazeera Arabic was reporting
fighting there between the Syrian army and the opposition.

Smoke was supposedly rising from Tal Kalakh as the rebels fought
to defend their stronghold. Fortunately, this appears to have been
fantasy and, during the several hours I was in the town, there was
no shooting, no sign that fighting had taken place and no smoke.

Of course, all sides in a war pretend that no position is lost without
a heroic defence against overwhelming numbers of the enemy. But
obscured in the media’s accounts of what happened in Tal Kalakh was an
important point: the opposition in Syria is fluid in its allegiances.

The US, Britain and the so-called 11-member “Friends of Syria”, who met
in Doha last weekend, are to arm non-Islamic fundamentalist rebels,
but there is no great chasm between them and those not linked to
al-Qa’ida. One fighter with the al-Qa’ida-affiliated al-Nusra Front
was reported to have defected to a more moderate group because he
could not do without cigarettes. The fundamentalists pay more and,
given the total impoverishment of so many Syrian families, the rebels
will always be able to win more recruits. “Money counts for more than
ideology,” a diplomat in Damascus told me.

While I was in Homs I had an example of why the rebel version of
events is so frequently accepted by the foreign media in preference
to that of the Syrian government. It may be biased towards the rebels,
but often there is no government version of events, leaving a vacuum to
be filled by the rebels. For instance, I had asked to go to a military
hospital in the al-Waar district of Homs and was granted permission,
but when I got there I was refused entrance. Now, soldiers wounded
fighting the rebels are likely to be eloquent and convincing advocates
for the government side (I had visited a military hospital in Damascus
and spoken to injured soldiers there). But the government’s obsessive
secrecy means that the opposition will always run rings around it
when it comes to making a convincing case.

Back in the Christian quarter of the Old City of Damascus, where I am
staying, there was an explosion near my hotel on Thursday. I went to
the scene and what occurred next shows that there can be no replacement
for unbiased eyewitness reporting. State television was claiming that
it was a suicide bomb, possibly directed at the Greek Orthodox Church
or a Shia hospital that is even closer. Four people had been killed.

I could see a small indentation in the pavement which looked to me
very much like the impact of a mortar bomb. There was little blood in
the immediate vicinity, though there was about 10 yards away. While I
was looking around, a second mortar bomb came down on top of a house,
killing a woman.

The pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, so often
used as a source by foreign journalists, later said that its own
investigations showed the explosion to have been from a bomb left in
the street. In fact, for once, it was possible to know definitively
what had happened, because the Shia hospital has CCTV that showed
the mortar bomb in the air just before it landed – outlined for a
split-second against the white shirt of a passer-by who was killed
by the blast. What had probably happened was part of the usual random
shelling by mortars from rebels in the nearby district of Jobar.

In the middle of a ferocious civil war it is self-serving credulity on
the part of journalists to assume that either side in the conflict,
government or rebel, is not going to concoct or manipulate facts to
serve its own interests. Yet much foreign media coverage is based on
just such an assumption.

The plan of the CIA and the Friends of Syria to somehow seek an end
to the war by increasing the flow of weapons is equally absurd. War
will only produce more war. John Milton’s sonnet, written during the
English civil war in 1648 in praise of the Parliamentary General Sir
Thomas Fairfax, who had just stormed Colchester, shows a much deeper
understanding of what civil wars are really like than anything said
by David Cameron or William Hague. He wrote:

For what can war but endless war still breed?

Till truth and right from violence be freed,

And public faith clear’d from the shameful brand

Of public fraud. In vain doth valour bleed

While avarice and rapine share the land.

ARMENIA’S GROSS EXTERNAL DEBT PUT AT $7.7 BILLION

ECONOMY | 01.07.13 | 10:38

Armenia’s gross external debt put at $7.7 billion

NAZIK ARMENAKYAN
ArmeniaNow

The gross external debt of Armenia as of March 2013 made over $7.726
billion, increasing by nearly $95.8 million over the same period
last year.

The National Statistical Service of Armenia reports that nearly
40 percent of the gross external debt originated within the state
government system, more than 14 percent in the private sector, almost
9 percent in monetary regulation bodies and more than 25 percent in
commercial banks. It says that almost 12 percent of the gross external
debt is due to direct foreign investments received by organizations
in various economic fields and intercompany loans, reports Panorama.am.

As of late March 2013, Armenia’s gross external assets made more
than $4.817 million, decreasing by about $22.6 million in the first
quarter of the year. As a result, Armenia’s net foreign debt in Q1
of 2013 grew by over $118.4 million, totaling $2,909,490.

New details on detention of Armen Chakhalyan

June 29, 2013 | 17:06

YEREVAN. – Seventeen people were detained in the clash between
Armenian young people in Javakhk, Armenian-populated region of
Georgia. Armen Chakhalyan, the brother of Armenian activist Vigen
Chakhalyan, was among the detainees.

Chakhalyan was not present during incident and was detained
immediately after he arrived at the scene, head of civil movement
`Multinational Georgia’ Arnold Stepanyan told Armenian News-NEWS.am.

The charges against Armen Chakhalyan have not been brought so far, he
said. Fourteen detainees were later set free. Three people, including
Chakhalyan, remain in custody.

Asked why Chakhalyan was detained, law enforcers told the lawyer that
it was dark at the scene, and they detained the first person they saw.

As reported earlier, a scuffle broke out between Armenian youth on
Friday evening and involved a group of 150-160 Armenians, including
underage.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

Nabucco loses bid to bring Azeri gas to Europe

28.06.2013 / 09:52 CET

Shah Deniz consortium chooses Trans-Adriatic Pipeline over EU’s
preferred bidder.
The decade-long battle to pipe Azeri gas to the European Union has
been won by the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), a consortium of
Norwegian, German and Swiss companies.

TAP’s victory dashes the immediate hopes a project long advocated by
the EU, the Nabucco pipeline. However, Azerbaijan and the European
Commission have both indicated that they expect enough gas will
eventually be available to convince Nabucco’s backers to continue with
their plan.

TAP will carry Azeri gas from Turkey’s border to Greece to the
southern tip of Italy, passing through Albania and through the
Adriatic Sea.

Nabucco’s original plan was to build a pipeline all the way from
eastern Turkey to central Europe, but it dramatically reduced its
plans after Turkey and Azerbaijan agreed in mid-2012 to build a
pipeline themselves, called the Trans-Anatolia Pipeline (Tanap).

Its truncated plan – known as Nabucco West – envisaged carrying gas
from Turkey’s border with Greece through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary
to the gas-transport hub of Baumgarten in Austria.

The decision to opt for the southern option, TAP, was made by the
consortium that is developing the giant Shah Deniz II field in the
Azeri waters of the Caspian Sea. Its leading members are Azerbaijan’s
state-owned SOCAR, Norway’s Statoil and BP, a multinational energy
giant.

BP, which leads the Shah Deniz consortium, has said that the Shah
Deniz II gas field is the biggest gas discovery it has ever made and
the most complex project that it has taken on.

The EU currently receives about 2.5 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas
from Azerbaijan, via Turkey. TAP is designed to be able to carry 10 to
20 bcm per year. Azerbaijan believes it will ultimately be able to
pipe a total of 50 bcm per year to Turkey and the EU.

The European Commission had no role in the selection and was
officially neutral, but Nabucco had benefited from the advocacy of
several European commissioners because it was seen as a means of
reducing the dependence of several EU member states – Romania,
Bulgaria and Hungary – on Russian gas.

Nabucco’s prospects began to buckle several years ago when would-be
investors baulked at the cost of the original plan for a 3,900
kilometre pipeline and Azerbaijan’s decision in 2011 to look to build
a pipeline itself with Turkey effectively took a major geopolitical
element in strategic thinking out of the EU’s hands.

The shortened version of Nabucco – Nabucco West – in 2012 beat off a
rival northern route, the South-East Europe Pipeline (SEEP), to make
it into the final selection round. This pitted it against the winning
southern option, TAP, a less ambitious plan put together by Norway’s
Statoil, Switzerland’s Axpo and Germany’s E.ON.

TAP will link up with the Ionian pipeline, which runs along the
Adriatic from Slovenia to Austria. This in turn will provide Bosnia to
a supply not controlled by Serbia or Russia.

TAP is expected to be built by 2019.

© 2013 European Voice. All rights reserved.