Author: Takmazian

US HOUSE ADOPTS $10 MILLION AID TO OCCUPIER SIDE IN KARABAKH
By Nilgun Gulcan with agencies

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Aug 4 2009

* The US Senate Appropriations Committee Maintains President’s Request
for Armenia Aid While Cutting Foreign Aid Budget. The US will make
aid to the occupier side in Karabakh, Armenians in the mid of the
sensitive peace negotiations. The Karabakh and many other Azerbaijani
provinces have been under Armenian occupation

WASHINGTON – On July 10 evening, the U.S. House of Representatives
approved the earlier Appropriations Committee requests for $48 million
in U.S. aid to Armenia and $10 million in aid to unrecognized Karabakh
Administration.

The decision has made happy the Armenian National Committee of America
(ANCA). House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations
chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), Congressional Armenian Caucus co-chair
Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), all active supporters
of Armenia assistance provisions, welcomed the House decision. There
is a strong Armenian lobby group in the US Congress.

The Armenian lobby members fully support the Armenian occupation in
the region although Armenia is one of the strongest allies of Russia
in the Caucasus.

HERITAGE PARTY CHARGES GOVERNMENT WITH SMEAR CAMPAIGN
Arman Gharibyan

2/
2009/08/04 | 13:47

Politics

Heritage Party spokesperson Hovsep Khurshudyan today charged the
Armenian government with leading an attack against the party and its
leader Raffi Hovhannisyan.

At a press conference, Mr. Khurshudyan stated, "This begs the
question why now? This negative campaign hints at the possibility
that the regime is preparing for early parliamentary or presidential
elections. I don’t foresee this but I don’t rule it out either."

"This campaign is based on falsehoods. Recently Galust Sahakyan
circulated a pack of lies which we refuted. But after this the flood
of absurdities and lies continued and proves that there’s a directive
out to do so. The lies are being presented via the T.V. as well but
we can only respond via the newspapers," he added Mr. Khurshudyan
called on T.V. stations to afford his party ample time to respond to
the charges being leveled at it. He said that the Heritage Party would
soon be issuing a statement of the government’s assault against it.

EAFJD CALLS ON OSCE CO-CHAIRS TO TAKE AZERBAIJAN’S MILITARY AMBITIONS SERIOUSLY

Panorama.am
17:20 03/08/2009

In a call to the OSCE, the European Armenian Federation for Justice
and Democracy expressed its profound concern about the danger to the
Caucasus security, and in particular to Armenia and its population,
resulting from Azerbaijan’s increased arms build-up and militarist
policies, EAFJD reports.

"Given the present realities in Azerbaijan and the threatening posture
of the Aliev regime, the Federation concludes that Azerbaijan has
violated the fundamental principles of international negotiations
by seriously committing itself to the military option while giving
lip service to the OSCE process. The Federation strongly urges
the Co-Chairs to refocus their efforts, first and foremost, on the
grave security threats resulting from Azerbaijan’s current national
priorities. Azerbaijan cannot be allowed to negotiate from a position
of open belligerence while the Armenian side negotiates in good faith.

The European Armenian Federation calls on the Co-Chairs to take
Azerbaijan’s military ambitions in the region seriously and, therefore,
demand solid non-aggression guaranties from the Azeri state prior to
any further discussions relating to the Minsk Group agenda. In the
present circumstances, a non-aggression pact obligating Azerbaijan
to peace is the only meaningful objective for OSCE before any further
moves could be considered.

Armenia and the Nagorno Karabagh Republic have a right to secure
themselves against the continuing threats from Azerbaijan. Furthermore,
the future negotiating process must not exclude the Nagorno Karabagh
Republic, as a full-fledged party to the negotiations. The Azerbaijani
security threats are first directed at the people of Nagorno Karabagh,
which must have its independent say in the process," message says.

NKR SHOULD BE A PARTY TO TALKS, OY MEMBER SAYS

/PanARMENIAN.Net/
03.08.2009 15:08 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ NKR’s right to self-determination, its overland
communication with Armenia and international security guarantees
should never be doubted, said Hovhannes Margaryan, member of Orinats
Yerkir party.

"This is our party’s principles, which are also precisely mentioned
in the Madrid Document," he said, adding that Nagorno Karabakh should
join the talks.

"Madrid principles were discussed by Orinats Yerkir party in detail
and we fully support the position of RA President," Margaryan said.

Ancient cross destroyed by vandals restored in Kiev’s Armenian
Cathedral
01.08.2009 11:07 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ An ancient wooden 17th century cross, destroyed by
vandals, was restored in Kiev’s Armenian Cathedral.
Restoration was conducted under the guidance of Lvov restorer Yuri
Ostrovskiy.
An interesting detail was discovered in the course of restoration:
feet of crucified Christ were left without special protective layer
the whole cross was initially covered with. Despite the absence of
lacquer coating, 200-year-old uncoated wood was not damaged. This was
the part of crucifix most often touched by the believers, which, in
masters opinion, created a peculiar biological aura, appearing to have
better effect than chemicals would, Analitika.at.ua reported.

Mensoian: Artsakh’s Independence Before Normalization: Reordering
Armenia’s Priorities
By Michael Mensoian

1/mensoian-artsakhs-independence-before-normalizat ion-reordering-armenias-priorities/
August 1, 2009

The following comment is attributed to President Ilham Aliyev of
Azerbaijan conjecturing on the possibility of Artsakh achieving local
autonomy when it is returned to Baku’s jurisdiction. `It may take a
year, maybe 10 years, maybe 100 years, or it will never be possible.
Time will tell.’ That mindset that Karabagh will revert to Azerbaijani
control is given credence by the continuing pressure by the Minsk Group
representing the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) for Armenia to accept another nuanced Madrid Proposal as the
basis for negotiating a resolution of the Karabagh conflict. To accept
these principles places the burden on the Armenian negotiators,
effectively precluding our brothers and sisters in Artsakh from ever
achieving a peaceful de jure independence.

Given that rather ominous outlook, the leadership in Yerevan remains
hell-bent on implementing an ill-conceived policy that seeks to
normalize relations with a government in Ankara that continues a
decades-long national policy of denial, obfuscation, and revisionism
with respect to the genocide of the Armenian nation that began on April
24, 1915. It should come as no revelation that the Turkish leaders have
no20intention of normalizing relations with Yerevan until the Karabagh
conflict is resolved. The Turkish solution is simple: The liberated
districts must revert to Azeri control and Karabagh’s ultimate status
to be determined by a vote under conditions and at an indefinite time
in the future. While Armenia seeks to appease Ankara on its western
border, for what purpose one might ask, it is being outflanked on its
eastern border.

These ongoing negotiations to achieve normalization are part of a
well-conceived Turkish diplomatic offensive that seeks to force Yerevan
into accepting compromises that are inimical to its political viability
and future security. The soccer invitation by Armenian President Serge
Sarkisian to Turkish President Abdullah Gul was part and parcel of this
shrewd Turkish offensive. The invitation was anything but spontaneous
by the Armenian president. The hesitancy by the Turkish president in
accepting was part of the drama that set the stage for the current
negotiations. Unwary Yerevan’better that said than to say they were
party to this subterfuge’has little if anything substantive to gain
from these negotiations. Yerevan has yet to produce any objective
evidence as to how normalization will promote its present
political-economic situation or long-term national security interests.
An analysis of the limited and conflicting information that is
available indicates that whatever gains may be anticipated will come
at an exorbitant cost to Armenia.

If this is not sufficient reason to end negotiations, perhaps a more
compelling reason is the need for Yerevan to reorient its priorities
and view Artsakh’s independence rather than normalization as the key to
its future. The loss of Artsakh would seriously weaken Yerevan’s
position within the south Caucasus and would likely result in the
disaffection of a significant number of diasporan Armenians. Yerevan
must develop and enunciate a stratagem supported by the major political
parties in tandem with Stepanakert that will maintain and strengthen
the de facto independence of Artsakh as this coalition works toward its
recognition as a free and independent political entity. Failure to
develop a broadly supported stratagem creates a vacuum that facilitates
the ongoing campaign by Ankara and Baku of comments from their leaders
that seek to create the illusion that negotiations are progressing
satisfactorily. This causes what they expect: confusion and
consternation on the part of the Armenian political parties not privy
to the negotiations, and an erosion of Armenia’s position in the
negotiations. The lack of an effective response by Yerevan makes its
leaders appear to be the intransigent neighbor while Turkey assumes the
role of the cooperative negotiator. It is a shrewd gambit by Ankara
that seems to be resonating with the principal players’the Minsk Group
representing the OSCE, of which Russia and the United States serve as
co-chairs with France, and by Russia and the United States as separate
entities apart from their participation in the Minsk Group’as they
continue to pressure Armenia to make compromises.

These nations want an open border’seemingly at Armenia’s expense’and a
peaceful resolution of the Karabagh conflict’at Karabagh’s
expense’ostensibly to bring political and economic stability to the
region. Political and economic stability in the south Caucasus is a
legitimate objective. However, nowhere are provisions suggested to be
implemented that would improve the economy of Armenia, its active
participation in the ongoing economic development programs and projects
in the south Caucasus, guarantees of free access to Black Sea ports in
Georgia and Turkey or to address the various issues that are an
outgrowth of the Armenian Genocide. Rather, both Armenia’s and
Karabagh’s vital interests are being ignored in preference to those of
Turkey and Azerbaijan. There is everything to suggest, based on the
available evidence, that if the present set of circumstances prevail,
Armenia and Karabagh will be relegated to political and economic
servitude, their potential forever circumscribed by the interests of
Ankara and Baku (see `The Roadmap to Normalization is a Roadmap to
Oblivion for Armenia,’ The Armenian Weekly, May 23, 2009).

The ultimate independence of20Artsakh must be viewed as infinitely more
compelling than the normalization of relations with Ankara. Failure to
achieve Artsakh’s independence will be the death knell for Hai Tahd,
which represents the Armenian nation’s legitimate demand for justice.
The first link in that long-sought demand for justice is the
recognition of Artsakh as an independent entity. Should that fail,
Yerevan has no hope whatsoever that the normalization of relations with
Turkey will be either politically or economically beneficial, or that
its national security interests can be protected. With a defeat in
Artsakh, what is it that normalization can yield? What incentive would
there be for Ankara to ever offer no more than token responses to the
legitimate Armenian claims of restitution, reparation, recognition (of
the genocide), and rectification (of the boundary)? Whatever
concessions that were finally made to Armenia would serve solely to
burnish Turkey’s image as a nation willing to overcome its past in
order to achieve political and economic stability within the south
Caucasus. Turkish leaders know that this ploy would play well in the
capitals of the European Union and the United States, whose governments
are anxious to finally settle the `Armenian Question’ redefined in the
context of their collective 21st century interests. Does anyone expect
the nations that have recognized the Armenian Genocide to support
Armenia’s cause under these circumstances?

For Yerevan the issue that must be confronted is not whether Karabagh
is part of the negotiation process, but the constant pressure to have
the Madrid Proposals serve as the basis for negotiations. No matter how
these proposals are nuanced , they are the same proposals that were
introduced in 2007 and they still speak to the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. Completely ignored is the principle that supports the
inalienable right of an ethnic minority to seek independence from the
rule of a despotic government. There is no part of international law
that precludes Artsakh from being recognized today as an independent
country. If the principle of territorial integrity was so sacrosanct
Kosovo could not have been recognized by the United States and Russia’s
recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia could not have occurred (see
`Is Artsakh’s Cause Less Than Kosovo’s?’ The Armenian Weekly, May 10,
2009).

Even a cursory examination of these principles leaves little doubt that
they are skewed against Karabagh’s independence. The first principle
requires the withdrawal of the Karabagh Defense Force from the
liberated territories that form Karabagh’s security zone. Withdrawal
from these lands would cause the Line of Contact (LoC) to contract to
the borders of the Karabagh districts. This would make the defense of
Karabagh immeasurably more difficult as well as effectively cutting it
off from both Armenia and Iran. The Lachin Corridor cannot be viewed as
a dependable link to Armenia if the Kashatagh and Lachin districts
(Kelbajar) are occupied by Azerbaijan. The Lachin Corridor road under
the best of conditions is a fragile link to Armenia and can be easily
severed once the security zone is occupied by the Azerbaijan military.
An international peacekeeping force under the aegis of the United
Nations might be an option. However, their effectiveness judged by the
past performances of such peace-keeping forces in similar situations
too numerous to mention is not reassuring. They normally have neither
the capacity nor the mandate to effectively challenge any military
action that the host nation may decide to take. What is the status of
the occupied eastern margins of Martakert and Martuni and the district
of Shahumian? Will they revert to Karabagh’s control or continue to
remain under Azeri occupation?

A second principle speaks to the return of internally displace persons
(IDP) to the liberated districts as well as to Karabagh itself. What of
the Armenian IDP’s that are in Karabagh who fled from Baku and Sumgait
and the districts of Shahumian and the eastern border regions of
Martakert and Martuni that are presently occupied by Azeri forces. Then
there are those Armenians that left Azerbaijan for Armenia or Russia.
These people are the only legitimate refugees of the war to liberate 0D
Artsakh, although the term is incorrectly used by Baku to identify
their IDP’s.

This requirement to resettle the IDP’s combined with a third principle
that suggests a future plebiscite to determine the status of Karabagh
all but insures that the people of Karabagh will never achieve
independence. When this plebiscite will take place will be determined
by whom? When will it be held? What geographic regions will be
included? Karabagh only? Or will the voting include all of Azerbaijan
as a referendum on whether or not Karabagh should be granted some form
of local autonomy? Actually none of these questions are relevant simply
because Karabagh’s independence will never be one of the options.
Possibly Aliyev’s off repeated threat of a military solution may be the
more desirable option (see `The Nagorno Karabagh Conflict Revisited,’
The Armenian Weekly, August 16, 2008).

The loss of Artsakh would represent a catastrophic political and
psychological setback for Armenia and for the creditability of the ARF.
Hai Tahd and the socioeconomic and political reforms that define the
ideology of the ARF would have been seriously tarnished. That may be a
harsh assessment, but it is closer to the truth than ignoring the
consequences of Artsakh’s demise.

Artsakh not only would represent a significant victory in the Armenian
nation’s determination to obtain justice, but it strengthens the count
ry’s strategic position athwart the Russian-Iranian north-south
axis and the Turkish-Azerbaijani west-east axis. At any moment Russia
has the capability to occupy Georgia which is Turkey’s only land
connection to Baku and beyond. The neutralization of Armenia and the
reversion of Karabagh to Azerbaijan would provide Turkey with an
important alternate route. There can be no doubt that Turkey desires to
extend its political and economic influence across the Caspian Sea into
central Asia and beyond. This is the old pan-Turanian (or Pan-Turkic)
dream resurrected.

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s recent charge that the Chinese
government was committing genocide in Xingtiang (Sinkiang) against the
ethnic Moslem Uighurs speaks to that objective. The United States,
Russia, and the European Union should consider that Turkey’s
geostrategic interests will ultimately run counter to their respective
geostrategic interests. From the Balkans to Chinese Xingtiang and from
the south Caucasus to the Gulf of Aden, there is no country within this
vast region that can compete on the ground with Turkey. This includes
both Israel and Iran.

No one questions the fact that Yerevan is not dealing from a position
of power. However, President Sargsyan courts disaster if he continues
to carry on negotiations without broad based political support and a
degree of transparency. Allaying suspicions and the need to engender
support from the diaspora is an absolute necessity. The ARF is well
positioned to make an important contribution if Yerevan accepts the
need not only to reposition itself with respect to its objectives, but
to develop a plan of action that speaks, first and foremost, to the de
jure independence of Karabagh. If not, then this difficult burden must
fall on the ARF to represent the people of Karabagh in their epic
struggle to become a free and independent entity.

RA PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSIAN MEETS YOUNG PARTICIPANTS OF COME HOME PROGRAM ON LAST DAY OF THEIR VISIT

NOYAN TAPAN
JULY 31, 2009
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, JULY 31, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. Armenia can not accept
any preconditions in the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations,
RA President Serzh Sargsyan noted on July 30 evening at the meeting
in Sevan with Diasporan young Armenians who are in Armenia within
the framework of the Come Home program. Turkey has its role in the
world and in the region but Armenia is also an independent state. RA
President reminded that we live in the 21th century and speaking with
preconditions and rude approach raise opposition. S. Sargsyan also
noted that Armenia did the maximum, expressed good will in spite of
the problems with Turkey, found some power in itself to offer Turkey
to establish diplomatic relations without any preconditions and
open the Armenian-Turkish border. "We negotiated for a whole year,
coordinated two documents, but after that some Turkish authorities
presented as a precondition the Nagorno Karabakh settlement and the
issue of Armenian- Azeri relations," the RA President said.

RA President expressed satisfaction with the meeting with Diasporan
young people, stressing that unlike a great number of his meetings
with representatives of Diasporan communities this meeting took place
in Armenia, which is good. The President attached importance to the
fact that Diasporan young people have an opportunity to see Armenia,
to find out how much the Armenian reality corresponds to their notions,
what is good or bad, which they would like to "import" and what to
"export" to the countries the citizens of which they are. RA President
cleared up that "No one in Armenia, especially I myself, thinks that
we have achieved very great success, that there are no problems,
that the difficult days are behind. No, there are a lot of problems."

Serzh Sargsyan expressed confidence saying that objective people,
nevertheless, should evaluate the things in comparison with each other
and should be optimistic, as without optimism you cannot achieve
any success and do great deeds. The President underlined that "our
grandfathers managed to give us a small Armenia, and we must give
our small but biblical, favorite and very beautiful country to our
children." The President attached importance to the Come Home program,
which gives an opportunity to the Diasporan Armenian young people to
feel Armenian spirit. deal with Armenian history and culture. According
to him, the peculiarity of the Come Home program is that it gives
an opportunity not only to see officials but also the attitude of
Armenian nation towards the Diaspora. 100 Armenian families have
hosted the Diasporan Armenian young people.

S. Sargsyan underlined that Armenia is one without Diaspora
and entirely a different one with Diaspora, which has a great
potential. The time will come when "we will be mighty and I am sure
that you will see it", S. Sargsyan said.

The Diasporan Armenian young people were interested in the question
of being granted citizenship of Armenia, and in response to that
question the RA President noted that no Diasporan Armenian has a
problem of being granted citizenship, not taking into account the
exceptions. Syrian Armenian Suren Rshtuni was interested in the issue
of deepening the Armenian-Syrian relations. The RA President noted
that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad has recently visited Armenia
and it is possible that in autumn the RA President will visit some
Arabic countries, including Syria.

RA Minister of Diaspora Hranush Hakobian speaking to the reporters
expressed satisfaction that the Come Home program organized by RA
Ministry of Diaspora has been implemented, the visit of 100 people
from Turkey, Georgia, Russia, Syria, Egypt, France ends, the next
group of 100 people will follow them and this will continue till the
end of October, participation of 500 and more young people in the
program is expected. The Minister hopes young people from Lebanon,
USA, Iran and other countries will join the Come Home program.

"The program has a great moral, psychological, political, historical
significance, we have set a task to make the Diaspora known for
Homeland and the Homeland for Diaspora, we have set a task that our
Diasporan children come, live in our Armenian families, get acquainted
with Armenian mode of life, traditions of Armenian families and also
gain friends. We want them to see and admire Mount Ararat, stand on
Armenian land, take power from it, wash their hands in Lake Sevan,
light a candle in the Mother See of Holy Echmiadzin and bend down in
front of the Genocide Memorial. I think after all this they will return
to their countries with stronger Armenian spirit to continue the most
important and necessary program of the preservation of Armenian nation,
which is to stay loyal to the Armenian identity, Armenian community,
Armenian church, Armenian state," H. Hakobian said. According to the
Minister, during the visit of all 500 young people 20 mln drams will
be spent.

The Diasporan Armenian young people were very impressed by their visit,
for example, Lilia Sardarian, whose family is in the Ukraine because
of the operations in Karabakh, evaluated the program as a program
of unifying the Armenian young people worldwide and getting to know
their homeland from depth. She was impressed by the lessons which she
had had in Armenia and as a result of which she learnt a lot of things
about Armenia, the history and culture of Armenian nation. The visits
to Armenian places of interest, art monuments were very important in
the issue of getting acquainted with Armenia. L. Sardarian assured
that next year when visiting Armenia she will know Armenian better. She
hopes that next year she will return to Armenia as a coordinator of the
program and will be able to help the RA Ministry of Diaspora in the
organization of the program. She and Egyptian Armenian Levon Apinian
were also very impressed by the meeting with the RA President. L.

Apinian noted that it was his third visit to Armenia, he had not been
in Armenia for over 10 years and during this visit he has discovered
a lot of new things for himself. Returning to Egypt he intends to
tell about his impressions to his contemporaries and to advise them
to follow his example.

AZERBAIJANI POLITICAL SCIENTISTS ASSESS UN DISCUSSIONS ON NAGORNO-KARABAKH AS CONTINUATION OF DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE ON ARMENIA

Trend
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijani political scientists consider the discussion of two
issues on the Nagorno-Karabakh at the 64th UN General Assembly as a
continuation of the diplomatic pressure on Armenia.

"Discussions will be useful as a means of exerting pressure on
Armenia. After the recent discussions at the UN on the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, Armenia’s mood is not the same. It felt isolated," Political
Scientist, Rasim Musabayov told Trend News on July 29.

The political scientist believes continuation of the diplomatic
pressure on Armenia is too important for Azerbaijan. "Although the UN
resolutions will not make Armenia liberate the occupied territories,
it should ways feel such a pressure," Musabayov said.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan
lost all of Nagorno-Karabakh except for Shusha and Khojali in December
1991. In 1992-93, Armenian armed forces occupied Shusha, Khojali and 7
districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan and Armenia signed
a ceasefire in 1994. The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia,
France, and the U.S. – are currently holding the peace negotiations.

The 64th UN General Assembly will debate two issues on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, UN HQ in New York told Trend News.

Political Scientist Zardusht Alizadeh considers discussions on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict at the UN General Assembly as a positive
phenomenon.

"But discussions are not enough to solve the problem. The discussions
must be accompanied by effective measures to establish the army,
peaceful diplomacy and effective information war. These measures
should be implemented in its entirety. The most important of these is
to continue to build a democratic society in Azerbaijan, capable to
solve problems of all citizens," Alizadeh told Trend News on July 29.

He said the steps taken towards the restoration of Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan yield positive fruits. "If the
problem cannot be solved by means of pressure, at least it is not
forgotten by acquiring new topicality in the society. Aggressor-Armenia
always feels Azerbaijan’s activity on the diplomatic front," said
Alizadeh.

Regarding non-fulfillment of four UN resolutions on the conflict,
the political scientist said the power is necessary to implement the
provisions of those resolutions. "Without force, these resolutions
are only political in nature. Their implementation is not obligatory,"
Alizadeh said.

Political Scientist, Vafa Guluzadeh does not expect progress after
the UN discussions on the Nagorno-Karabakh to resolve the issue. "The
UN four resolutions on this issue remain on paper. Even after the
discussions, UN takes any decision, none of steps will be taken to
implement it," Guluzadeh told Trend News on July 29.

He believes Armenia is a Russian "province" and does not exist as
the state. "As the UN fears Russia, it does not pass decisions on
this country. Therefore, we should wait," the political analyst said.

RA COURT OF APPEAL DECISION CREATES PRECEDENT FOR EMPLOYERS’ LAWLESSNESS

/PanARMENIAN.Net/
29.07.2009 14:57 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian Court of Appeal has rejected suits issued
by four teachers of Sayat Nova music school who protested against the
decision of the school director to unilaterally change the terms of
labor contracts.

According to lawyer Aram Karakhanyan, the verdict creates a dangerous
precedent and allows employers’ lawlessness.

For her part lawyer Mariam Ghuklyan said that the Court of Appeal has
neglected the decision of Court of Cassations, which said that express
contract may be concluded only if the job is temporary or short-term.

BUT THEY HAVE SUCH NICE BEACHES
by Marianna Grigoryan

Transitions Online
nguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=332&N rSection=3&NrArticle=20734
July 28 2009
Czech Republic

Turkey may be a mortal enemy, but it’s also Armenians’ favorite place
for summer vacation. From EurasiaNet.

Some Armenians call it a disgrace. Others put it down to
price. Turkey’s popular Mediterranean resort town of Antalya ranks
as Armenians’ top summer vacation destination, travel agents say,
and no amount of controversy over Turkish-Armenian ties looks likely
to reverse the trend.

Yerevan travel agency managers report that, amid a grueling economic
slowdown, Antalya’s reputation for low prices and high-quality
customer service outweighs for many customers the fact that it is
located within the borders of longtime foe Turkey.

Tez Tour’s Armenia office director, Narine Davtian, estimates that
by summer’s end her Russian-owned agency will have twice the number
of Antalya-bound customers as the 8,000 who chose to travel to the
Turkish town in 2008. Armavia’s four direct flights to Antalya each
week from Yerevan, a service offered by Tez Tour, are regularly full,
she said. "I am a patriot, but let’s not mix tourism and politics,"
Daytian commented. "No other country can provide the same range [of
travel options] and quality. People want a good vacation and they
get it."

Other travel company managers echo that assessment.

"We offer tours to different destinations – Bulgaria, Greece, Italy,
Georgia, Jordan – but the hottest tours are to Antalya in Turkey,"
said Flight agency manager Marine Ayvazian, who estimated that the
town is the choice of 70 percent of Flight’s customers.

The government has no data on the number of Armenians who travel to
Turkey each summer. Armenian travel agencies, it says, will not share
the information, and the lack of diplomatic ties with Turkey means
no alternative option for the data exists.

But while the notion of swimming in the Mediterranean Sea may appeal
to many landlocked Armenians, posters promoting Antalya’s "delightful"
sun-drenched beaches only bring to mind politics for others.

A youth group associated with the nationalist Armenian Revolutionary
Federation-Dashnaktsutiun has requested the Yerevan mayor’s office to
remove all street posters advertising Antalya and "to deal seriously"
with the issue. The mayor’s office has not yet acted on the request.

"Advertisements for a vacation in Antalya are springing up like
mushrooms and, instead of spending their vacations in Armenia,
people are leaving for Turkey. Is this normal?" complained Haroutiun
Melikian, who runs an anti-Antalya protest campaign for the Armenian
Revolutionary Federation’s Nikol Aghbalian Student Union.

"The money that goes to arm and strengthen Turkey [via tourism] could
remain in our country and contribute to our own strength," he added.

To combat Antalya’s popularity, the student group has hung posters
throughout Yerevan that declare that "Armenians who spend their
vacation in Antalya are arming the Turkish army."

Other placards focus on Ottoman Turkey’s 1915 slaughter of ethnic
Armenians, on slain Armenian newspaper editor Hrant Dink, or on Mount
Ararat, a symbol of Armenian ethnic identity located within Turkey.

"We decided to remind people of something they seem to have forgotten,
to sober them up," Melikian said.

Some Yerevan residents heartily second that decision. "Turkey shouldn’t
have won us over, since political pressures still persist and the word
‘Turk’ is still a curse for us," 34-year-old actor Vahe Nersesian
commented.

Employees of several government ministries said that unwritten rules
forbid state employees from spending their vacations in Antalya despite
a recent official push toward some form of rapprochement with Turkey.

MONEY TALKS

But the disapproval tactic does not always work.

"If I have to choose between the high prices of Armenian resorts and
an all-inclusive vacation at the seaside in Antalya, I’ll pick the
sea for my family and me, especially when the difference in prices
makes no sense," commented one Yerevan resident booking an Antalya
trip in a travel agency.

On average, travel agencies charge as little as $450 per person for a
weeklong package tour in Antalya, while a similar vacation at Armenia’s
Lake Sevan, the mountain resort of Tsaghkadzor, or the mineral water
spa of Jermuk start at about $700.

Yerevan State University psychologist Nelly Haroian believes that,
lured by the attractive prices, Armenians are able to put aside
misgivings about the past and feel "comfortable" visiting Turkey since
"Turks are serving them."

Given the crisis-friendly prices for tours to Antalya, expecting
any other reaction is not realistic, sociologist Aharon Adibekian
said. "There are many questions linked to national self-esteem, but
people are free to decide where to have a vacation and what to do,"
Adibekian said. The Armenian government says it plans to help with
that decision – and beat the competition – by promoting tours to the
disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh as an alternative to Antalya.

"We have no sea, and this is a difficulty. We plan serious steps for
developing domestic tourism to Nagorno Karabakh," said Mari Grigoryan,
deputy director of the Ministry of Economy’s department of tourism
and territorial economic development.

"The prices will be reasonable and will counteract those of Turkish
resorts," Grigoryan continued. "Travel agencies working in this
direction will get serious benefits." She did not elaborate.

But, while rich in mountain vistas and historical sites, Nagorno
Karabakh, a favorite with Armenian diaspora groups, has no resort
hotels or seaside sunbathing on offer.

That brings the question of a summer vacation back to the simple
matter of individual choice, Yerevan travel agents argue.

"We all are patriots," said Tez Tour’s Daytian. "And spending a
vacation in Turkey doesn’t mean being less Armenian."