Pashinyan will discuss the negotiation format of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with Aliyev

  • 06.03.2019
  •  

  • Armenia:
  •  

     

1
 44

The upcoming meeting with the President of Azerbaijan Aliyev will also be dedicated to discussions on the negotiation format. This was stated by RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan at a joint press conference with European Union Commissioner for Neighborhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations Johannes Hahn.


In particular, the journalist was interested in whether there are any new highlights from the meetings with Aliyev that can be published. 


“You know, our contacts were of an informal nature, and in fact we did not talk about the ways and nuances of the settlement of the Karabakh issue at all, therefore there is a slight misunderstanding in your question, saying that there is something to add, we have yet to start discussing.


As I said that I already said in Tehran, our upcoming meeting will be dedicated to discussions about the format, because we believe, and our position has not changed, that for the effective settlement of the issue, it is necessary to first of all create an effective format, the purpose of which is to ensure the participation of Nagorno Karabakh in the negotiation process,” said Pashinyan.


Johannes Hahn also believes that the current format of the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict should be preserved.


“During the term of office of the new RA prime minister, it became possible to hold new meetings, including between foreign ministers. That’s already progress. As for the EU support for the settlement, we believe that the existing format should be preserved, not something new created. We need to discuss how we can support cooperation between countries in various fields. There should be opportunities, I think that the conditions in the region are quite favorable to further improve the regional situation. We should support the settlement of the conflict, but only at the request of the parties, the parties know how to work,” Han said.

Asbarez: Innovate Armenia Comes to USC on May 18

A panel discussion during last year’s Innovate Armenia event

LOS ANGELES—Innovate Armenia, the flagship program of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, will come to USC on Saturday, May 18, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

The one-of-a-kind event is a festival of ideas, music and action, featuring talks by young scholars on ancestral roots, post-revolution leaders from Armenia, art, music, and Armenian beer.

The program is themed around the concept of “OLD ROUTES TO NEW ROOTS.” The Old Routes are those that take us through the historical Armenian lands. Scholars will address issues of geography, genealogy, memory, identity. The New Roots are those being put down in the Republic of Armenia – the new Armenia. Scholars, policy experts and senior members of government will talk about goals, strategies and challenges at this new and transitional time in Armenian history.

Children play chess during a past Innovate Armenia event

The popular music stage will feature innovative musicians from the Armenian world, including the legendary Richard Hagopian with his son and grandsons, and groups from Beirut and Armenia. Last year’s chess platform was a hit and this year, too, grandmasters will be engaging the public in games. Traditions of beer making and coffee drinking will be showcased, with samples and stories.

Nearly 4,000 people from throughout California attended Innovate Armenia in 2017, and another 20,000 watched the day’s events Live, both in Armenian and in English.

“We are proud that INNOVATE ARMENIA has become the destination event that feeds people’s intellectual curiosity and appetite for fun and fulfillment. This year, especially, we are looking forward to the stories that scholars policy makers have to tell about how to build a new Armenia, without forgetting about reconnecting families and traditions after the rupture of the Genocide,” says Salpi Ghazarian, director of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies.

A panel discussion during last year’s Innovate Armenia event

LOS ANGELES—Innovate Armenia, the flagship program of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, will come to USC on Saturday, May 18, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

The one-of-a-kind event is a festival of ideas, music and action, featuring talks by young scholars on ancestral roots, post-revolution leaders from Armenia, art, music, and Armenian beer.

The program is themed around the concept of “OLD ROUTES TO NEW ROOTS.” The Old Routes are those that take us through the historical Armenian lands. Scholars will address issues of geography, genealogy, memory, identity. The New Roots are those being put down in the Republic of Armenia – the new Armenia. Scholars, policy experts and senior members of government will talk about goals, strategies and challenges at this new and transitional time in Armenian history.

Children play chess during a past Innovate Armenia event

The popular music stage will feature innovative musicians from the Armenian world, including the legendary Richard Hagopian with his son and grandsons, and groups from Beirut and Armenia. Last year’s chess platform was a hit and this year, too, grandmasters will be engaging the public in games. Traditions of beer making and coffee drinking will be showcased, with samples and stories.

Nearly 4,000 people from throughout California attended Innovate Armenia in 2017, and another 20,000 watched the day’s events Live, both in Armenian and in English.

“We are proud that INNOVATE ARMENIA has become the destination event that feeds people’s intellectual curiosity and appetite for fun and fulfillment. This year, especially, we are looking forward to the stories that scholars policy makers have to tell about how to build a new Armenia, without forgetting about reconnecting families and traditions after the rupture of the Genocide,” says Salpi Ghazarian, director of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies.

Azerbaijani Press: Vova Vartanov: "Give me all your weapons, we can return some territory"

Turan, Azerbaijan Opposition Press
Feb 18 2019
Vova Vartanov: “Give me all your weapons, we can return some territory”



Yerevan/16.02.19/Turan: “At the very beginning of the Karabakh conflict in 1988, I was among those who rallied in the square, but then I realized that this was not enough and we had to act. Then my aunt and her husband’s relatives lived in Azerbaijan, and I had to take them by bus via Georgia. Later, in 1989, after the arrest of members of the “Karabakh” committee, I was offered to go to the border with Azerbaijan and organize self-defense units taking into account my military experience, since I served with the special purpose troops of the General Intelligence Agency (GIA). “The participant of the Karabakh war, the commander of the first Armenian reconnaissance detachment Vova Vartanov told about it in an interview with Turan.

“In November-December 1989, we assembled the first in-depth reconnaissance detachment and conducted the first operation in January 1990 in the Gazakh region of Azerbaijan. I will keep silence about other operations,” he says, confirming that he participated in various operations and military operations, the information of which he does not want to disclose.

In January 1992, the formation of combat detachments began, which in the future became part of the Armenian army. I then acted as an adviser and at the same time was a member of the special squad under the commander of the Armenian forces, and in fact the Minister of Defense Vazgen Sargsyan. Our task was tactical and strategic military intelligence.

When asked to disclose the contents of one of the military operations, Vartanov, after deliberation, said that his group had penetrated into Gazakh district in January 1990 in order to verify information on the removal of ammunition from the Soviet army. “According to the official version, Soviet troops took ammunition and weapons to Georgia. But we got into Gazakh and found that the ammunition from Armenia was transported to Azerbaijan, to warehouses a dozen kilometers from Gazakh,” said the source.

Why is it today that it is preparing young people for hostilities, the ability to survive, and teaches the need to fight with Azerbaijan? To this question, Vartanov replies that he and his comrades organized survival courses, which, among other things, have a military purpose: handling cold and firearms, survival tactics in extreme conditions, including urban ones.

On a clarifying question whether his pupils will participate in a possible war with Azerbaijan, Vartanov said that they had already participated in the April 2016 war. “My supporters participated as volunteers in the battles in the south and north of Karabakh and showed themselves well and helped stop the advancement of the Azerbaijani forces,” he said. The Armenian side called the April battles “blitzkrieg”, and some “reconnaissance in force.” Is such an assessment correct? Our interlocutor disagrees with these assessments, considering those events as “rather a political action” in order to put pressure on the Armenian side.

“I am sure that the Azerbaijani side wanted to pull away the forces of the center in Karabakh to the north to the village of Talysh and to the south to Lala Tepe. Having pulled the forces of the center, the Azerbaijani side planned an attack on Agdam and further on Askeran. However, a sufficient number of our forces in the central direction did not allow the enemy to carry out this plan,” says Vartanov.

How does he evaluate the current fighting efficiency of the Azerbaijani army? “To be honest, I seriously appreciate it. The amount of money you spend on the army could not help but bring results. You have a good army – normal weapons, training. I like it, but there is a problem with motivation,” said the source.

On the question of how he assesses the combat capability of the Armenian army, Vartanov says that even if Armenians do not have such modern weapons, and they are fewer than Azerbaijan. Even if the training is not the same as that of the Azerbaijani side, Armenians have enough weapons and control over the heights remains. “And this is important to stop not only your army, but also the Ottoman. I have already talked about motivation. How does it differ from Armenians and Azerbaijanis? Your motivation is hurt because you won the war, despite the numerical superiority, but we have a desire to survive,” said Vartanov.

According to him, the Armenian Armed Forces did not participate in the battles in Karabakh, as they expected the offensive of the Turkish army and prepared to repel it. “It was real in 1992-93,” says Vartanov.

How, then, to explain that after the signing a truce in 1994, during the battles of 1995 and 2016 and in the Nakhchivan sector, Armenians only retreated and lost territories? Why, if their motivation is stronger?

Our interlocutor explains this by the repeated superiority of the Azerbaijani forces when the brigade attacks the company. “This can only be at the beginning. This is the advantage of the one who attacks first; but then the motivation and training of the troop”s works.

I was against frontal attacks on those points that we surrendered to you in April 2016 in order to avoid casualties. It was possible to take in another place where you did not wait and offer an exchange. But the Armenian leadership refused this idea and executed the order received from Moscow,” says

Isn’t it better to reach an agreement with Azerbaijan, liberate the territories around Karabakh and get something in return, improve relations and develop normally? After all, if the new war and the Armenians lose territory, they will hardly get anything in return. Is there a similar scenario in Armenia?

Vartanov responded that of course peace is better than war. “But I do not agree that any peace is better than war. If you take these lands, you will not stop there. There is Armenia, which does not allow you to connect with Turkey, and you are going to take Yerevan,” says Vartanov.

To the remark what people in Armenia talks about the need to take Ganja and the land to Kura, raise Talyshs and Lezghins and create a federation in Azerbaijan, our interlocutor responds that in Azerbaijan it is necessary to create a federation like Switzerland consisting of national cantons.

“This will allow you not to be aggressors. Why is autonomy not for Armenians, but not for Talysh, Lezgins and Avars? You had the only option to attract the Armenians of Karabakh to remain in Azerbaijan, becoming a federal state,” said Vartanov.

To the question what is the incompatibility of Armenians and Azerbaijanis, he answers that there is a different mentality. “You have a nomad mentality, but we are sedentary. Therefore, it is difficult for us to get along,” he specifies.

Was it worth starting the Karabakh movement, taking into account the tragedy that befell the two peoples? Is not it better to find a common language and solve all problems peacefully?

Vartanov does not agree with the opinion that the actions for the secession of Karabakh were initiated by the Armenian intelligentsia and turned into a separatist movement with the connivance of Moscow. In his opinion, there were no prospects for Armenians in Azerbaijan. “How was it possible to get along, how could Karabakh people not demand secession from Azerbaijan, taking into account the fate of the Armenians of Nakhchivan? You know that when the Nakhchivan autonomy was created, a significant Armenian population existed on this territory. “And where are they now?” asks Vartanov.

I have already asked my question to this: then half of the population of Yerevan were Azerbaijanis, not to mention the significant Azerbaijani population of all of Armenia, and where are they now?

To this, Vartanov says that from the 17th century, “Armenian territory” was settled by Shah Abbas, who evicted Armenians from here and settled it with Turks. Armenians tried to return, but a massive return happened only after the Russian-Turkish and Russian-Persian wars in the 19th century, the First World War and the events of 1915.

After that, there was a wave of the Armenian population, which, according to the Stalin plan, was to be settled in the 1940s with the Soviet army in eastern Turkey. This is how the percentage of the population in Armenia changed, he says.

What was the reason for the movement of the Armenians of Ottoman Turkey in the 19th and 20th centuries, who set a goal to create their own state in eastern Turkey?

According to Vartanov, the reason was the oppression of the Armenian population by the Ottoman government, the attitude towards Armenians and Christians as disloyal citizens. “And in general, the savagery of the Turkish authorities,” he says.

Enver Pasha was encircled during the First World War battles and he was rescued by units manned by Armenians, nevertheless he declared all Armenians traitors for the fact that Armenian volunteer guards had gone over to Russia. “Or maybe it was just a reason to clear the land, rob?”, – continues Vartanov.

If Armenians are deserting, moving to the side of the enemy and fighting against their state, what did they expect from the Turkish authorities? To this question, Vartanov says that deserters should be arrested and tried, “but what”s the point, women and children?” According to him, there were no less deserters among the Kurds and Arabs, but there were no repressions against their population, but only against Armenians and Assyrians.

That is, the Armenians did not give a special reason for persecution. Our interlocutor responds to this: “The deserter gave a reason, and for this the people were punished. Is this fair?”

Similar things happened in 1988, when unarmed and innocent Armenian citizens suffered and died. Just because someone, somewhere, did something. “This happened many times,” says Vartanov.

Being asked if it means that the Armenians did not committed any illegal actions against

Azerbaijanis, Vartanov modestly replies, “I don”t know, maybe it was.” “But there were no wild things, like in Baku, in Sumgayit,” he assures.

When asked about the massacres of Azerbaijanis in Gugark, he stated that there was nothing like that. “Name at least one last name,” he says. The remark that the prosecutors and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR conducted an investigation of these cases, which confirmed numerous murders of Azerbaijanis, our interlocutor bypasses, demanding to present the registered facts of the violent death of Azerbaijanis in Gugark. At the same time, he said that he knows a couple of cases of beatings of Azerbaijanis in Armenia.

When asked whether this means that Armenians did not commit war crimes against Azerbaijanis, he says, “I”m sure that they did, because it was impossible to control everyone. I am sure that there were acts that can be called military crimes. But we did not have crimes against the civilian population,” says Vartanov.

If tomorrow is war again, will his pupils fight, those Armenians who go to Armenia and study in his military camps? Vartanov replies, “Everyone will fight.” Would not it be better to make peace by returning a part of the territories and improve relations with Azerbaijan? Vartanov replied that this is impossible. “Which area can be changed and what for? None.

To give Kalbajar means suicide. It means separating us and being able to destroy individually. We will not do this nonsense. Gubadly, Lachin, Zangelan – the same.

Gubadly, Jebrail, Fizuli – this is the valley of the Kura River, if we return them- this will give you the opportunity to maneuver large forces of armored vehicles, infantry, artillery, covering Karabakh from the flank. If we return Fizuli, you will reach a place where you can shoot at Karabakh with the most primitive shells, the same thing is Agdam,” says Vartanov.

You mean that the Armenians will not return anything around Karabakh. Vartanov said: “Something can be returned in exchange for all your armored vehicles – 560 tanks, all your artillery and missiles, and we can give you something,” said Vartanov without specifying exactly what he meant.

When asked what percentage of Armenians also think, the interlocutor responds – 85%. -02B-

Armenia commiserates with Iran over deadly terrorist attack

Mehr News Agency, Iran
Feb 15 2019


TEHRAN, Feb. 15 (MNA) – Armenia has expressed condolences over Wednesday’s terrorist attack on a military convoy in Iran that killed at least 27 border soldiers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and wounded many others.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan offered condolences to Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani over the deadly terrorist attack in Iran.

“I was deeply shocked by the news of a terrorist attack on a bus in Sistan and Baluchestan, causing dozens of casualties,” Pashinyan said.

He offered deepest condolences to the Iranian president and nation. He also wished a speedy recovery to those injured.

A suicide bomber targeted a bus carrying members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps traveling on a road between two cities in the province, which straddles the border with Pakistan. A car filled with explosives detonated alongside the bus.

The so-called Jaish ul-Adl terror group, which is based across the border in Pakistan and is responsible for kidnapping Iranian border guards and carrying out other terrorist attacks of this kind in Zahedan over the past years, has claimed responsibility for the Wednesday night’s terrorist attack on social media.

The Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs also expressed deepest condolences to the families and friends of the victims.

“It is with great sorrow that we learned about the terrorist attack in the Iranian province of Sistan and Baluchestan. We express our deepest condolences to families and relatives of those killed, wishing them strength of spirit and resilience to overcome this heaviest of sorrows,” the Ministry said in a Twitter post.

MNA/PR

Armenia’s electricity generation up in 2018: statistics

Panorama, Armenia
Feb 11 2019

Armenia saw a growth in electricity generation last year, according to the latest official statistics.

The country produced a total of 7 billion 776.9 million kilowatt-hours of electricity in 2018, up by 0.2% from the previous year, Panorama.am learned from Armenia’s Statistical Committee.

According to the figures, the electricity generation at thermal power plants grew by 17.5% to stand at 3 billion 375.6 million kilowatt-hours last year.

Some 40.1 thousand gigajoules of thermal energy were produced in the country in 2018, an increase of 31% from 2017.

Meantime, the electricity production volumes at hydropower plants increased by 2.2% in the reporting period, amounting to 2,318.2 million kilowatt-hours.

The electricity generation at solar power plants stood at 5.1 million kilowatt-hours last year, securing a growth of 12.8% from the previous year.

In 2018, Armenia’s Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) generated 2,076.1 million kilowatt-hours of electricity, down by 20.7% against the 2017 production.  

‘The press must constantly criticise, particularly as we do not have powerful opposition now’

Aravot , Armenia
Feb 5 2019
Hovhannes Movsisyan – ‘In first person’
‘The press must constantly criticise, particularly as we do not have powerful opposition now’
Anna Israyelyan interviews Hovhannes Movsisyan
[Armenian News note: the below is translated from the Russian edition of Aravot]

How did it happen that the authorities, which have an impressive representation of journalists [in their ranks], have established a rather strained relations with some media outlets? We asked the question to the head of the Government Informational and Analytical Centre SNCO [State Non-Commercial Organisation], Hovhannes Movsisyan, who is the guest of the In First Person programme of the Aravot newspaper. As an example, we initially reminded that as it turned out, on 14 July 2018, the government refused to subscribe to newspapers and that the SNCO headed by Movsisyan monitors information flows, preparing press reviews. In response, our respondent said that it was only the government office that refused to subscribe, considering this as a senseless waste of resources: “More often than not, rolls [of newspapers] were brought in and taken away untouched, as no-one read newspapers”. He also said that their centre did not prepare press reviews: “We report to the senior management about problems raised in the press”. This is aimed to secure the authorities’ proper reaction, which was non-existent previously and problems raised in the press were mostly ignored.

Former, incumbent governments’ similar attitude towards media

Here is yet another parallel between the incumbent and the former authorities: Previously, they used to place the blame on journalists, [saying that] “the real reason for migration was the unpleasant atmosphere and that people saw no hope. Why? Because for many years, at least two TV stations and dozens of printed and electronic media spoke only about bad news, framing things in a negative way”. Even today, the leader of the country accuses journalists of something of the kind: “This is propaganda of desperation, which was spread before the [velvet] revolution – propaganda that nothing is going to change, that it is not worthwhile to place hopes on anyone, and that it is better to leave here, and so forth.” In the meantime, some of his team-mates insist that “instead of making a positive impact on people’s way of thinking, you misinform them”. Commenting on the aforementioned parallel, Hovhannes Movsisyan said that at present, there was slightly more concern among media specialists and media representatives than before: “At present we are facing a problem with the press. It is not clear what media outlets these are. Sometimes, they set up websites with weird names, causing problems to editions such as Aravot and others. Sometimes, websites have no addresses or responsible editors and fail to meet the standard. However, they are nevertheless considered as news websites.” Our respondent added that the same applied to social networks, where spreading disinformation had reached menacing proportions.

I would like to emphasise that the media faced a problem of the kind even earlier. In particular, in 2016, it was this that made editors of 15 newspapers and websites issue a statement, in which they suggested fixing the situation, in particular, by giving information about their addresses, telephone numbers, editors’ names and details in a well visible place of the website, as this was the case with newspapers. However, at that time, the statement had opponents. One of them was the then columnist in the Civilnet [website] and incumbent secretary of the National Security Council, Armen Grigoryan, who dubbed the initiative on regulating the information field as “a challenge to the development of freedom of speech”. He insisted that “the authorities could use the given instrument at their own discretion” and that “the given initiative by the 15 media outlets allow state agencies to limit freedom of speech, which is sure to have a negative impact on the information field, as freedom of speech must be an absolute value”.

“Armen Grigoryan voiced his opinion and I am going to voice mine,” Mr Movsisyan replied, repeating the opinion of specialists about our legislation, which regulates the given sphere, its being out of date, and the need in amendments. “However, I think that this should not be done by the government. Perhaps, the forces in parliament should jointly do this. Different media companies, editors, the Union of Journalists, and public organisations should perhaps come up with suggestions.”

Opposition ‘not powerful’, press to criticise government

We also asked the head of the Information and Analytical Centre SNCO, Hovhannes Movsisyan, about his attitude towards the concerns about the media “publishing only negative information, failing to see positive [developments]” and whether they realised that under any authorities, it was the business of the press to speak about negative developments. In response, Movsisyan said: “Voicing criticism is the job of the press. The press must constantly criticise, particularly as we do not have powerful opposition now and the authorities form a majority. In this case, together with the opposition, which is small in number, the press should show vigilance, detecting problems. This is extremely important. And I assume that if in some cases, different figures do not accept criticism, this is mostly related to the quality and material of their criticism. Sometimes, I notice cases, when they write about my structure and these reports leave me as a journalist asking a number of questions. However, I think that we should show understanding to the media, as at present, the press is also undergoing changes. In my opinion, with time, we will get quality and a quality picture and everything will work out well.” Our respondent added: “I really need to be sure that after all this, we do not lose respect for the media and journalists, as we sometimes notice hate speech about representatives of the press. In my opinion, this is wrong. This must not be the case.”

In this context, our respondent touched on the statement, which was made by more than 10 editors on 17 July 2018. In particular, the statement was about the trends, which aroused concern. The statement also emphasised the need in the authorities’ reaction regarding the need in preventing intimidations and offenses against the otherwise-minded. “To begin with, the government has no instruments to interfere in the work of social networks. Second, the government cannot call readers not to criticise the press, can they? I do not know and I am not sure about the effectiveness of acts of the kind,” he emphasised.

Media, not government, to cope with hate speech

This concern of editors about the propaganda of hatred, which was previously also voiced by the Armenian human rights defender, was finally raised on international platforms. During the recent discussion of the report on monitoring the early parliamentary election in Armenia, the head of the Delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Aleksander Pociej, said: “In some cases, people were scared to go to ballot stations because of hatred and intolerance in the social media.” On a number of occasions, the head of the EU Delegation in Armenia, Piotr Switalski, said in his interviews: “In the EU, we are extremely concerned about hate speech in Armenia. I invite the Armenian government to review the existing legislation to see how to influence the situation. In addition, we also invite civil society to actively combat hatred.” Asked whether it was possible to settle the issue with the help of legislative regulations or whether it was necessary to take the path of administrative or criminal punishment in each concrete case, Hovhannes Movsisyan said that it was necessary to find global solutions for the legislation regulating the work of the media. However, he again emphasised that this had to be done by representatives of the press, rather than government: “To make sure that this is not perceived as interference in the work of the media. Otherwise, accusations might be levelled against the government regarding the issue.”

Former authorities waging ‘media war’ against incumbent government?

At the end of our conversation, we asked our respondent whether he agreed with the following statement by Deputy Speaker Alen Simonyan of the [ruling]My Step bloc: ‘The former authorities declared media war against our government. We accepted the challenge and we have nothing to worry about, as we are extremely honest… They waged media war, but they are sure to lose.” Hovhannes Movsisyan emphasised that this was rather a political statement, which he would comment on as an expert: “There is a wave of criticism and doubts about the media being possibly guided by different forces. However, I suppose that this is also linked to the fact that the press is subject to criticism quite intensively. However, I would like to reiterate that I am a supporter of criticism. Due to criticism, one can get better, after all… Sometimes, I say that I am a representative of the press in the government, rather than the other way round. I want many people to realise that journalists are people, who voice criticism. They are no enemies. These are not the people, who would not like things to be fine in this country. They reveal all problems in good faith. I would like to [hope] that this viewpoint is understood and therefore, I do not want [people] to lose respect for journalists and the mass media as a result of all this.”

During our conversation, we also touched on journalists’ dissatisfaction with the work of some agencies and their press service, as well as gradual obscuring of the media at the expense of popularisation of social networks. See more on this and many other issues in the video material.

Punjab youth stuck in Armenia: Kapurthala travel agent arrested

Yahoo! News
Feb 8 2019
HT Correspondents
hindustantimes

Hours after external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj spoke to Punjab chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh and asked him to apprehend the travel agents responsible for the plight of four youth stuck in Armenia, police on Thursday arrested a travel agent in Kapurthala.

Komaldeep, 27, of Jandiala in Amritsar, was working as a middleman for Armenia-based agent, Harpreet Kaur, in Kapurthala and its surrounding areas.

SSP Satinder Singh said raids are on to nab the other accused booked for sending four people to Armenia fraudulently.

On Tuesday, police had registered three FIRs against six travel agents for duping Harmanjeet Singh of Nadala town, Jatinder Singh of Amritsar , Shamsher Singh of Bholath and his wife Pinki. The agent had sent them to Armenia on travel visa after promising him a work visa in December 2018, police said.

Earlier, the CM assured Swaraj of strict action against the agents. The CM also directed the DGP for appropriate action.

After talking to Amarinder, Swaraj also called up to Sangrur MP Bhagwant Mann, who brought the issue to her notice.

Nikol Pashinyan met the regional director of the German KfW bank

  • 31.01.2019
  •  

  • Armenia:
  •  

4
 78

RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan arrived on an official visit to the Federal Republic of Germany.


The Prime Minister’s visit started from Cologne, Germany. On the morning of January 31, Nikol Pashinyan met the Eastern Europe Regional Director of the German Development Bank (KfW), Olaf Zimelka.


The RA Prime Minister noted that KfW is an effective partner for the Republic of Armenia, with which a number of projects are implemented in various branches of the RA economy. In this context, Nikol Pashinyan emphasized the importance of 2018. The grant agreement signed with KfW Bank in November on the project “Biodiversity and sustainable local development in Armenia” with a total value of 23,208,483.13 euros, which is one of the most significant projects in this field in our region.


The Prime Minister emphasized that bringing this sector in line with high environmental standards in Armenia is one of the important priorities of the government and it is gratifying to have such a reliable ally in this matter, in the form of the German Development Bank.


The regional director of KfW, in his turn, noted that Armenia is an important partner for the German Development Bank, with which effective projects are being implemented. Expressing satisfaction with the course of cooperation with various departments of our country, O. Zimelka added that the Armenia-KfW partnership contributes to the development of Armenian-German ties, and the bank is interested in discussing and implementing new initiatives.


The RA Prime Minister and the regional director of KfW discussed the progress of current projects in the fields of environmental protection, energy, agriculture, infrastructure, water management and reservoir construction, as well as exchanged ideas on the issues of expanding cooperation in other prospective directions.

Sharmazanov: As a result of Pashinyan`s policy, Armenia became an outcast in the CSTO

Arminfo, Armenia
Jan 29 2019
Ani Mshetsyan

ArmInfo. As a result of Nikol Pashinyan’s policy, Armenia had a number of problems in the sphere of foreign policy. For example, Armenia has become an outcast in the CSTO. The press secretary of the Republican Party of Armenia, Eduard Sharmazanov, stated this at a press conference on January 29.

“The difficulties in the CSTO began after Armenia recalled its  representative Yuri Khachaturov. Due to Pashinyan’s unprofessional  policy, Armenia lost the post of CSTO Secretary General and this is  only the tip of the iceberg,” the RPA press secretary stressed.

Sharmazanov also noted that despite the numerous statements of  Pashinyan, relations with Russia do not cause much optimism: “If  everything is really so wonderful, it seems, tell me, why did the gas  prices go up?” Sharmazanov also criticized the statements of the  Prime Minister that he was against Armenia’s entry into the EAEU and  now believes that this step was not entirely correct, but there is  nothing to be done; it will have to be reconciled. “Pashinyan did not  understand that he became the head of the republic and is responsible  for the whole country. Meanwhile, his personal “I” is more important  for him. In addition, how can he then explain the fact that in Davos  he praised in every way EAEU “, the politician asked.

Asked by ArmInfo’s correspondent whether the politician continues to  state that Serzh Sargsyan’s decision to join the EEU was in the  interests of Armenia, Sharmazanov said: “Armenia’s accession to the  EEU was the only right decision for Armenia. And if we have some  opportunity today to ensure economic growth, this is solely at the  expense of the EAEU market. Where could we sell our goods on such a  scale, where our goods will be sold? Because of Pashinyan’s policy,  we became outcasts in the CSTO, became an unpredictable partner

The Prime Minister played with his actions with the authority of this  structure. Nobody knows what to expect from us? How can we cooperate  if they don’t know what to expect from us, if they don’t trust us. I  believe that these are dangerous phenomena that should be dealt with.  We have no other alternative than the EEU, “the RPA spokesman  concluded.

To note, on January 25, at a briefing at the headquarters of the  Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) in Moscow, the Prime Minister  stated that when he was a deputy he voted against joining Armenia to  the Eurasian Union, and later held hearings about Armenia’s  withdrawal from the EEU.

Armenia’s New Parliament Convenes, Elects Speaker

Newly-elected Parliament Speaker Ararat Mirzoyan was elected almost unanimously (Photo by Photolur)

YEREVAN (Azatutyun.am)—Armenia’s new parliament elected last month almost unanimously chose a close associate of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan as its speaker at its inaugural session held on Monday.

The new speaker, Ararat Mirzoyan, is a 39-year-old former scholar who became the country’s first deputy prime minister following last spring’s mass protests that brought Pashinyan to power. He is a founding senior member of Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party, the dominant force in the My Step alliance that swept to a landslide victory in the December 9 parliamentary elections.

Mirzoyan was backed by 131 of the 132 members of the National Election in secret ballot. He was nominated for the top parliamentary post by My Step and endorsed by the two other parties represented in the legislature: Prosperous Armenia and Bright Armenia.

“We are electing you as National Assembly speaker but we don’t know what kind of a speaker you will be,” Bright Armenia leader Edmon Marukyan told Mirzoyan before the vote. Marukyan expressed hope that he will act like an “impartial arbiter” in his new capacity.

Speaking during a parliament debate on his candidacy, Mirzoyan pledged to strive for a stronger “parliamentary oversight” of the government and said he will be “open to dialogue” with the opposition minority. At the same time he urged the Prosperous Party of Armenia and Bright Armenia to “work together” with the government instead of “confronting” it on every issue.

Later on Monday, the parliament began discussing candidates for the three posts of deputy speaker. Two of them will be held by other senior My Step figures: Lena Nazaryan and Alen Simonyan.

The Armenian constitution reserves the third post of deputy speaker for a representative of the parliamentary opposition. My Step confirmed that its 88 deputies have been instructed to vote for a BHK candidate, Vahe Enfiajyan, on Tuesday.

Senior representatives of Pashinyan’s bloc argued that the Prosperous Party of Armenia is the second largest parliamentary force controlling 26 seats, compared with 18 seats held by Bright Armenia.

Marukyan dismissed this explanation, saying that the constitution says nothing about the size of an opposition faction nominating a vice-speaker. He said that unlike Enfiajyan, Bright Armenia’s candidate for the job, Mane Tandilyan, would be widely perceived as a “real opposition.”

Tandilyan served as minister of labor and social affairs in Pashinyan’s cabinet until this month.