Author: nina hovnanian

DAVID BABAYAN: GULUZADE TRIES TO HIDE HIS BILE, STATEMENT OF AZERBAIJANI PRESIDENT’S EX-ADVISOR NEEDS NO COMMENT

Panorama.am
18:30 16/11/2012

Mr Guluzade is perhaps seriously worried about the visits of the
delegation of Uruguay and other states to Artsakh, and therefore,
he tries to hide his bile by making such unserious comments, Artsakh
President’s spokesman David Babayan told Panorama.am in an interview
while commenting on a recent statement by ex-advisor to Azerbaijani
President Vafa Guluzade.

We will remind that Guluzade told Azerbaijani media that the visit
of Uruguayan delegation to Nagorno-Karabakh was organized “with
Diaspora funds.”

Babayan stressed that the Armenian people and Armenian statehood are
“based on trinity, Armenia- Artsakh- Diaspora,” and therefore all
above mentioned components represent a common unit.

“In this case, I think it is unserious to differentiate who funded
the visit, who provided the vehicle and who entertained the delegates.

That is why such a statement needs no comment,” the spokesman added.

Regarding the motivation of the visit of Uruguayan delegation to
Artsakh, Babayan noted, “You should be confident that no one will ever
visit Artsakh unless he is really interested in it. This is evident
to everyone. Guluzade understands it pretty well but he attempts to
show such approaches for the sake of his own calm. Besides, the very
Azerbaijan that opened a diplomatic mission in the Argentine capital
Buenos Aires also works rather actively in Uruguay through bribery,
but we see that they fail to reach any result.”

According to Babayan, this approach should serve as an example for
Azerbaijan, making them understand that not everything can be bought
in this world.

SYRIAN-ARMENIAN FILMMAKER DETAINED, ARTISTS CALL FOR HIS RELEASE

November 16, 2012

ALEPPO, Syria-Syrian-Armenian filmmaker Avo Kaprealian has been
detained, his friends in Aleppo have confirmed.

Witnesses say that Kaprealian was last seen with two of his colleagues
with a camera in a public park in Aleppo. He was working on a new
film about the humanitarian crisis caused by the Syrian conflict.

Avo Kaprealian Avo Kaprealian was born in Aleppo in 1985. He studied
at Haigazian Armenian Elementary school, then in Karen Jeppe Armenian
College. He graduated from the University of Damascus with a degree in
theater and cinema and worked in various film productions there for
a few years, before moving back to Aleppo and starting teaching art
and theater in Akkad institute. He managed the first public cinema
club in the city with a group of friends, and he is one of the most
notable filmmakers in the new wave of young artists in Syria.

Kaprealian participated in the 9th Golden Apricot Yerevan International
Film Festival last July with his short film “Two Steps Too Close,”
which was dedicated to the legendary Armenian director Ardavazt
Peleshian. Kaprealian’s films always tackle humanitarian issues. His
latest film is about disabled people in Aleppo, but it wasn’t shown
yet because of the difficult circumstances in the city, especially
during the last four months.

According to Avo’s friends in Aleppo, the Kaprealian family and
friends are pursuing the release of their son. A Facebook page was
created by his friends calling for his release. A petition by a group
of Armenian artists also called for his release.

ARMENIA TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL RISKS WHEN BUILDING NEW POWER PLANT UNIT: PRIME MINISTER

YEREVAN, November 16. /ARKA/. Armenian authorities will take into
account all the risks when building a new nuclear power unit, which
will meet all safety standards, Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian said
today at a meeting with members of the Club of Editors of the CIS
countries, the Baltic States and Georgia.

Sarkisian stressed that nuclear energy has a future, despite the risks.

“The recent disaster in Japan at Fukushima nuclear power plant made
all pay closer attention to the safety of nuclear power plants,” he
said, adding that he does not support the idea of shutting down NPPs.

He said the statistics show that security risks in chemical industry
are higher than in the atomic field.

“But this does not mean we should close chemical plants”, Sarkisian
said, stressing that the resolution of all issues must be balanced
with regard to the safety and needs of society.

Armenia’s nuclear power plant in Metsamor located some 30 kilometers
west of Yerevan, was built in the 1970s but was closed following a
devastating earthquake in 1988 that killed some 25,000 people and
devastated much of northern Armenia. One of the plant’s two VVER
440-V230 light-water reactors was reactivated in 1995. Armenian
authorities said they will build a new nuclear power plant to replace
the aging Metsamor plant.

The new plant is supposed to operate at twice the capacity of the
Soviet-constructed facility. Metsamor currently generates some 40
percent of Armenia’s electricity. But the government has yet to
attract funding for the project that was estimated by a U.S.-funded
feasibility study to cost at as much as $5 billion. Last month the
Armenian government decided to extend the service life of the Armenian
nuclear power plant in Metsamor by another ten years. -0-

ARMENIA PARTICIPATES IN EXHIBITION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL TOURISM IN ITALY

NEWS.AM
November 15, 2012 | 23:10

YEREVAN. – Armenia is participating in the exhibition of Mediterranean
archaeological tourism in the Italian city of Paestum. The Armenian
delegation has been formed by the Ministry of Culture. In the
exhibition, which will take place November 15-18, Armenia will
be participating as a guest country. Armenia’s Minister of Culture
Hasmik Poghosyan has been included in the guest list of the first day,
along with an advisor of UNESCO Mounir Bouchenaki.

>From the Armenian side the exhibition will be attended by
representatives of the Ministry of Culture, the Armenian Embassy
in Italy and six private tour operators and marketing consultant for
promotion of tourism from Italy to Armenia Nadia Pascal. The delegation
has been supported by USAID and the National Competitiveness Foundation
of Armenia.

GEORGIAN PM DISCUSSES NATIONAL MINORITIES’ PROBLEMS WITH OSCE COMMISSIONER

news.am
November 16, 2012 | 11:35

Georgia’s Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili met with OSCE High
Commissioner on National Minorities Knut Vollebaek to discuss the
solutionÑ~A to the national minorities’ problems.

Knut Vollebaek informed the Premier of projects carried out by OSCE
for national minorities in Georgia. Premier Ivanishvili expressed
government’s readiness to continue cooperation.

The Commissioner welcomed the fact that new Georgian government is
ready to continue the integration process of ethnic minorities and
to protect their rights, Georgia Online reported.

One of the largest ethnic groups in is the Armenian community which
is mostly concentrated in Tbilisi and the Samtskhe-Javakheti region
bordering with Armenia.

FARS: ERDOGAN’S POLICY TOWARDS MUSLIM NATIONS OF REGION IS FALSE

Panorama.am
16/11/2012

The Syria incident showed that the real aim of Turkey in the region is
to restore the Ottoman Empire, says an article by Iran’s semi-official
Fars news agency.

Slamming the dual and false policy of Turkish Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan towards Muslim nations of the region, the Iranian news
agency says, “After the incident between Erdogan and Israeli President
Shimon Peres in Davos, nations fighting for their rights in the region
were enthusiastic about such a step taken by Turkish Prime Minister,
however, as the time showed, this step was not in the interests of
Islam, but was a tactical move aimed at raising his authority in
the region.”

“Ankara’s passivity in connection with the deaths of nine Turkish
citizens in the Israeli naval attack on the Turkish flotilla revealed
secret relationship between Turkey and Israel. Anticipating things,
we can notice that in the initial period of Syria destabilization
Turkish government with the consent of Israel sent its servicemen
for training for sabotage operations to Tel Aviv.

So the real face of Erdogan and his government gets unmasked more and
more every day. The Syria incident shows that the real aim of Turkey
in the region is to restore the Ottoman Empire,” says the author.

Summing up the criticism of Turkish authorities, the Iranian news
agency says, “If Turkey has proclaimed itself the defender and
supporter of the fighting nations in the region, then why doesn’t it
stop its relationship with Israel, why doesn’t it cancel the security
agreements with this country? The scream of Gaza children is a serious
ordeal for Erdogan and the Arab world, Erdogan’s allies. The future
will show if their statements proclaiming that they are patrons of
fighting nations are real.”

GALUST SAHAKYAN CONSIDERS THE POSSIBILITY OF THE RECOGNITION OF ARTSAKH BY URUGUAY

10:08, 16 November, 2012

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 16, ARMENPRESS. It’s possible that Uruguay
will recognize the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. The Head of the
Parliamentarian Group of the Republican Party of Armenia Galust
Sahakyan stated this in a conversation with “Armenpress”. He said
that the reason of the visit of the delegation of the Chamber
of Representatives of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay was quiet
different. Galust Sahakyan said: “Recently we are doing everything
possible so that the delegates of various countries could come and
see and get acquainted with Artsakh, because it alters the attitude
of the people greatly. This is the main reason we want them to visit
Artsakh.” Sahakyan expressed a conviction that the more people know
of Artsakh, the more raises the possibility of its recognition by
various countries.

The Uruguayan delegation headed by the President of the Chamber of
Representatives of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay Jorge Orrico
arrived in Armenia on November 12 at the invitation of the Speaker
of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia Hovik Abrahamyan.

Jorge Orrico visited Tsitsernakaberd to pay tribute to the memory of
the victims of the Armenian Genocide.

During the meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Armenia Eduard Nalbandyan the President of the Chamber of
Representatives stated that they are on the side of the principles of
the international law. He noted: “Uruguay will do everything possible
to maintain the international peace and put forward the right of
self-determination of the nations.”

Uruguay recognized the Armenian Genocide in 1965. The Oriental Republic
of Uruguay was the first country in the world to recognize and condemn
the Armenian Genocide.

EDOUARD NALBANDIAN REAFFIRME SON REFUS DE MODIFIER LE FORMAT DES NEGOCIATIONS DE PAIX AVEC L’AZERBAIDJAN
Gari

armenews.com
vendredi 16 novembre 2012

S’exprimant lors d’une conference de presse jeudi 15 novembre aux côtes
de son homologue litiuanien Edgars Rinkevics, en visite officielle a
Erevan, le ministre armenien des affaires etrangères Edouard Nalbandian
a reitere la position de son gouvernement concernant le maintien du
format actuel des negociations de paix avec l’Azerbaïdjan autour du
Haut-Karabagh sous l’egide du Groupe de Minsk de l’OSCE ; dans le
cadre de ces negociations, il a rappele la necessite de souscrire aux
principes fondamentaux d’un règlement du conflit tels qu’ils ont ete
presentes par les mediateurs internationaux au cours des dernières
annees, et qui ont n’ont pu faire l’objet d’un accord en 2011, en
raison de l’intransigeance de Bakou.

M. Nalbandian repondait a la question d’un journaliste, concernant
l’idee agitee avec insistance depuis quelques temps a Bakou en faveur
d’une nouvelle ” feuille de route ” pour le règlement du conflit du
Haut-Karabagh. Cette proposition de Bakou doit etre mise en regard
avec la recente tentative des mediateurs internationaux de relancer
le processus de paix auquel l’affaire Safarov avait donne un brusque
coup d’arret cet ete. L’accueil reserve par les autorites de Bakou
a l’officier azeri Ramil Safarov, qui avait ete extrade le 31 août
par les autorites de Hongrie alors qu’il avait ete condamne par la
justice hongroise a une peine d’emprisonnement a perpetuite pour le
meurtre en 2004 a Budapest dans le cadre d’un seminaire de l’Otan a
l’officier armenien Gourgen Markarian, avait provoque un regain de
tensions entre l’Armenie et l’Azerbaïdjan.

Le minister armenien des affaires etrangères avait refuse de rencontrer
son homologue azeri le 4 septembre a Paris où devaient reprendre les
pouparlers au sujet du Haut Karabagh sous l’egide des copresidents
russe, francais et americain du Groupe de Minsk qui avaient donc
rencontre les ministres separement ; tout en condammant l’attitude
de l’Azerbaïdjan et en denoncant la grâce accordee par le president
Aliev a R. Safarov, avait tente de provoquer une rencontre entre les
ministres des affaires etrangères des deux pays en marge de l’Assemblee
generale de l’Onu a la fin septembre, mais sans resultat.

L’Armenie avait toutefois fait savoir qu’elle etait disposee a sauver
le processus de dialogue et M. Nalbandian rencontrait pour la première
fois depuis juin, son homologue azerbaïdjanais Elmar Mammadyarov
a Paris le 27 octobre en presence de la troïka du Groupe de Minsk,
soucieuse de relancer le processus de paix autour du Karabagh.

L’Armenie n’a fait etat d’aucun progrès a l’issue de cette rencontre.

Dans un entretien accorde au Figaro, durant sa visite officielle
en France le 12 novembre, le president armenien Serge Sarkissian a
precise que les entretiens de Paris ne donnaient pas lieu d’esperer
quant a l’avenir du processus.

“Bakou refuse d’accepter les principes proposes par les mediateurs
internationaux comme base de negociations, en estimant qu’il est
possible de parvenir directement a un accord de paix en faisant
l’economie de tels principes. Mais un accord de paix ne saurait etre
viable que s’il est fonde sur des principes clairement definis,
acceptables pour chacune des parties”, avait explique le chef de
l’Etat armenien. Après un entretien avec M. Sarkisian a l’Elysee le
12 novembre, le president francais Francois Hollande a indique pour
sa part que la France envisageait de poursuivre ses efforts en vue de
parvenir a un règlement durable du conflit du Karabagh, conformement
aux principes dits de Madrid.

Lors de sa conference de presse a Eerevan, M. Nalbandian a ecarte
l’option d’une nouvelle “feuille de route”, induisant qu’un règlement
par etapes pourrait relancer le processus. Il a indique qu’il avait
l’impression que “les auteurs d’une telle proposition en sont restes
a une approche typique des annees 1990”. “Quelque 17 ans se sont
ecoules depuis 1995, le train a quitte la gare, mais certains en
Azerbaïdjan sont encore restes sur le quai”, a declare le chef de la
diplomatie armenienn, en resumant avec ironie l’histoire du processus
de paix. Il a souligne qu’une “feuille de route” concernant certains
des principles cles du règlement du conflit avait deja ete presentee
aux parties par la communaute internationale. “Mais nous ne pouvions
faire de progrès au sommet de Kazan alors que l’Azerbaïdjan rejetait
ces propositions”, a rappele M.Nalbandian, dans une allusion aux
principes fondamentaux dont l’Armenie estime qu’ils s’appuient sur la
conjugaison du droit des Armeniens du Karabagh a l’autodetermination,
de l’integrite territoriale de l’Azerbaïdjan et aussi le non recours a
la violence comme a la menace de violence dans le règlement du conflit.

“Je ne pense pas que l’idee presentee en Azerbaïdjan concernant une
nouvelle feuille de route puisse etre prise au serieux, d’autant plus
quand il est question d’une feuille de route qui a ete presentee il t
a 17 ans “, a conclu M. Nalbandian, qui a aussi evoque les declarations
faites par les leaders du Groupe de Minsk en marge des recents sommets
du G8 et du G20, appelant les parties du conflit a avancer sur la voie
d’un accord sur les principes de base d’un plan de paix au Karabagh.

vendredi 16 novembre 2012, Gari ©armenews.com

TURKEY HAS MOST PART OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR FAILURE OF TURKEY-ARMENIA PROTOCOLS, SAYS TURKISH INTELLECTUAL

tert.am
16.11.12

Osman Kavala is the Chair of Board of Anadolu Kulture which is a
non-profit company based in Istanbul. The mission of Anadolu Kulture
is to build bridge among different ethnic, religious regional groups
through cinema, literature, photography, contemporary art and music.

Tert.am has interviewed Osman Kavala over the Armenian Genocide issue
and the normalization of Armenia-Turkey relations.

When do you think the relations between Turkey and Armenia will
normalize?

I think this issue is not too much dependent on the historical
problems. It seems at the moment the Karabakh conflict and Turkey’s
close economic relations with Azerbaijan are the dominant factors.

Turkish government took a rigid position, connecting the opening of
the border to the resolution of Karabakh conflict. For understandable
reasons, Armenia would not be interested to resume political relations
with Turkey as long as the border remains closed.

What do you think which of the countries, Turkey or Armenia has the
most part of responsibility when it comes to the current state of
the normalization process?

In the protocols, the Karabakh issue was not mentioned. So, I believe
Turkish government has the most part of responsibility for the failure
of the protocols by introducing this condition. But, on the other hand,
I also think that it will be in the best interests of Armenia if this
conflict can be resolved earlier. Not only to improve relations for
Turkey, but in order to build a stable democracy in the region.

Wars and armed conflicts do exert negative impact on the development
of liberal norms and practices.

Do you think Turkey will ever recognize the Armenian Genocide and if
yes, when?

It is not possible to give a definitive answer to this question. I
don’t see the prospects likely in the foreseeable future. However,
we see that there will be a change from the original official position
which in effect alleges the Muslim losses during the First World War
were comparable to the Armenian loses.

There are a number of factors which can influence Turkey’s position.

One of them is related to the external dynamics. I believe, progress
in the accession to the European Union would play a positive role.

Establishment of friendly relations with Armenia can also facilitate
the weakening of historical prejudices. Internal dynamics of Turkey
would certainly be very significant. The development of the liberal
democratic culture in Turkey will lead to a more open and critical
assessment of historical events. Regretfully, there are some cliches
and prejudices which dominate the understanding of the historical
events, in particular those which happened during the First World War.

Ottoman state lost lots of territories during the Balkan Wars and
the First World War. Before the War, Russia and the European states
tried to be influential on the domestic politics of the Ottomans, in
particular in those matters related to the Christian minorities. So,
among the Turks there was a conceptualization to link the interests
of the foreign powers with those of the Christian communities living
in Anatolia.

Turkey did not participate in the Second World War, which could have
changed this basic popular conceptualization of relations with the
European powers. I think, lack of this experience caused the First
World War memories to remain alive. Unfortunately, the educational
system did little to change these narratives and prejudiced attitudes
towards history. So, you will see many people in Turkey who would
still argue that the Armenians were expelled because they sided with
the Russians in the First World War, European powers and Russia used
minorities to weaken and divide the Ottoman state.

What do you think the Turkish society can do for the recognition of
the Armenian Genocide by the Turkish state?

I see that the main role of the civil society should be to counter
these narratives, these prejudiced conceptualizations which continue
to be reproduced in different forms. Turkey wants to be a member of
the EU, but you will still hear people arguing that Europe wants to
divide Turkey by using Armenian and Kurdish issues.

The most effective way to eradicate such prejudices would be to
prepare the history text books in a different, critical perspective.

This of course requires a new policy. There are civil initiatives
advocating such a policy change.

OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION AND TURKISH-US RELATIONS
by Ramazan Gözen*

Today’s Zaman
Nov 15 2012
Turkey

Barrack Hussein Obama was re-elected to the US presidency in the Nov.
6 election. This can be translated into approval by Americans of
Obama’s four-year performance and their demand for his continued
office.

The election result can be interpreted as Americans’ support for
stability and peace. The majority of the electorate did not opt for
Mitt Romney, who championed the hard-line pro-war and anti-immigrant
policies of former President George W. Bush, but for the incumbent
President Obama, who played his cards for peace and dialogue. Former
President Bush caused not only his country but also the entire world
to pay a hefty cost for what he had done and it was most likely that
Romney was going to follow suit.

The US presidential election is an important determinant for both
America and the rest of the world, the Middle East in particular. We
know that the US has a traditional foreign policy, that world politics
is not comprised of the US alone and that the president cannot change
everything by himself. However, we should not lose sight of the
fact that the president of a mighty country such as the US has the
potential power to make an impact on the fate of the world. A look
at past terms shows this very easily. While US policy when Clinton
helmed the country (1993-2001) made contributions of relative peace and
stability to the world, the Bush administration (2001-2009) plunged
the world into violence, conflict, war and instability. President
Obama tried to change not only the directives but also the mindset of
the war policy he inherited from his predecessor Bush and made some
visible headway in his endeavor. The official end of US occupation
in Iraq with the withdrawal of troops, the start of the pull-out
process in Afghanistan, progress in the fight against terrorism with
the killing of Osama bin Laden, exercising restraint in the Libyan
war by not dispatching soldiers and the rejection of demands for a
military operation in Syria are proof of President Obama’s desire
to resolve international problems through non-military ways. Besides
that, President Obama has done his best for international conflicts
to be resolved through diplomacy, negotiations and compromise.

Turkey was among the countries President Obama trusted and relied
on the most in that process. Obama demonstrated his trust in Turkey
by making his first foreign trip to Turkey after taking office
and addressing the Turkish Parliament. That started the Turkish-US
model partnership era. The two countries embarked on an advanced
and courageous cooperation for the peaceful settlement of problems
in the Middle East, the Balkans and the Caucasus, the most important
of which were the setting up of a new order in Iraq and Afghanistan,
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia, peacemaking between Syria and
Israel, finding a settlement to Iran’s nuclear program, the two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and the development of
cooperation in the Balkans. However, all those initiatives fell short
of bringing about the expected or planned results. Nothing conclusive
has resulted from the joint efforts of the two countries. The model
partnership projects proved insufficient in ensuring regional peace
and stability. The US and Turkey made a lot of efforts to resolve
the problems; Obama and Recep Tayyip Erdogan maintained very close
cooperation in that process and even had more than one telephone
conversation a day at times, but to no avail.

Failure of regional actors

We believe that the lack of support from other countries, namely
Russia, Iran and Israel, is the primary reason why the two countries
failed in their efforts. Neither the regional countries nor the
concerned national and international actors gave the desired nod but,
on the contrary, contributed to an outbreak of new problems and crises
as we saw in the Mavi Marmara incident and the axis shift controversy.

It was also realized in that period that Turkish-US relations
were not periodical and not dependant on a certain issue but had a
structural continuum. The two countries maintained their cooperation
and coordination regarding the installment of the NATO missile defense
system and the Arab Spring transformations. They also entered into
a compromise agreement for a new order to be set up in the region.

President Obama gave wholehearted support for Turkey to play a role
in the Arab Spring and wanted peace and stability to be established in
the region with the joint efforts of the two countries. What is known
is that the two leaders were always in touch during that process,
speaking on the phone or physically meeting to consult on regional
matters. We can say that their model partnership has given way to
favorable results in Egypt and Tunisia and partly in Libya, making
contributions to the transformations in those countries.

Syria, though, should be considered separately. Although Turkey
and the US are in agreement for a transformation in Syria and the
replacement of the Bashar al-Assad regime, they have differing views
as to how that should be materialized. Turkey supports, as in the
case of Libya, military intervention, though Obama exercises caution
in that regard. Despite Assad’s resistance and callous insistence on
murdering his own people and the outbreak of a wild civil war in the
country, Obama and the leaders of other NATO countries preferred to
give a military operation a wide berth, which shows the difference
between Turkey and the Obama administration.

In short, Turkey and the US enjoyed good relations and a good
level of cooperation in President Obama’s first term. It is almost
apparent that it will continue in the forthcoming second term. The
major topics that will star in the upcoming term are the civil war
and the ensuing transformation in Syria, Iran’s nuclear program,
the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Iraq’s territorial integrity and
the stance of the Nouri al-Maliki administration, northern Iraq,
and the Kurdish issue and the fight against Kurdistan Workers’
Party (PKK) terrorism. The major parameters of cooperation in all
these areas will be methods of peace and diplomacy. There will not
be cooperation based on the use of military force and the means of
war and other power policies. No one should expect a quest for a
solution to drag the US, Russia and China into a hot confrontation
because the US cannot afford to lose Russia and China for the sake
of Syria. We are of the conviction that Turkey’s foreign policy will
also be shaped within that framework.

*Dr. Ramazan Gözen is an instructor at Yıldırım Beyazıt
University.

*.html