TEAMS FROM 14 COUNTRIES DIDN’T REACH QUARTERFINAL OF AIBA BOXING CHAMPIONSHIP
/PanARMENIAN.Net/
27.05.2009 10:11 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Teams from 14 countries didn’t reach quarterfinal
of AIBA boxing junior championship, which is underway in Yerevan.
England was the first to leave. Then Algeria, Croatia, Dominican
Republic, Greece, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Morocco, Puerto Rico and
Sweden followed.
In all, teams from 42 countries are participating in the championship.
"MAINDORF-2" IN ST. PETERSBURG
Karine Ter-Sahakyan
PanARMENIAN.Net
23.05.2009 GMT+04:00
Most likely in Saint Petersburg there will be signed just another
transient document, meant for the Armenian and Azerbaijani societies.
On June 6 at the non-formal CIS summit in Saint Petersburg there
will be held another meeting between the Presidents of Armenia and
Azerbaijan. Judging by the increasing number of newspaper reports,
the parties interested in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict regulation
expect any kind of breakthrough from the summit. The pressure on
Armenia and Azerbaijan is growing in all directions. Above all, it
is Russia that is interested in achieving any kind of result, as she
is eager to repeat the "success" of the Maindorf Declaration. Most
likely the Saint Petersburg meeting will also be completed by signing
a certain so-called Memorandum of Intentions on Conflict Regulation.
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Let us first of all note that the West is now
playing a waiting game rather than occupying an active position;
Bryza’s statements are, naturally, not counted. Europe is waiting
for Armenian’s response to Moscow’s pressure, after which she can
dictate her rules for the game. In a broad sense, Yerevan cannot be
said to be the loser but neither is it appropriate to expect special
dividends. Azerbaijan is in no better position – in exchange for
waiver of Nabucco, Moscow will promise her nothing more but one or
two regions in the security zone. Still a pair of months ago political
scientist Leyla Aliyeva (Ilham Aliyev’s daughter) dropped a remark that
Azerbaijan can obtain only two regions at best… Certainly she knows
what she says. The only question is which two regions she meant. If
we use the method of exclusion, we stop at Fizuli and Cebrail. But
here the factor of Iran comes forth. The thing is that right in these
regions the latter is building hydroelectric power plants. We’ll not
even speak of the other regions as they are of military-strategic
significance and their handing would undoubtedly mean losing the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic.
In exchange, Yerevan might be proposed a recognized status of the NKR,
to which Baku gives no consent. Although, who knows, the majority
of statements of the Azerbaijani President are directed to his own
people and hardly can they be received seriously at least by the
co-chair countries.
However, there is one circumstance to be considered. A bulk of false
information has been thrown into the region recently, misrepresenting
the real state of affairs. It must have required minimal efforts taking
into account the non-professionalism of media outlets of all the South
Caucasian countries, and it can be deduced that the throw-in has been
consciously calculated to worsen the relations between the countries,
of course if further worsening is possible. Rumours about certain
documents "almost ready to be signed" are directed to accelerating
the repartition process of the existing boundaries, and it may all be
done much earlier than we expect. The Caucasian society lives chiefly
on mutually excluding rumours and fantasies. Against this background
it is most easy to start a diplomatic war, which can easily develop
into a real one as soon as all the interested parties are tired of
convincing Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Iran to come to a friendly
agreement. Energy is the core of everything – the rest is secondary. In
this regard the Saint Petersburg summit, in spite of the loads of
empty phrases, will be dedicated to the gas pipe, which Russia is
eager to monopolize. And if Moscow succeeds in ‘breaking’ Armenia,
the issue of Nabucco can be considered almost settled. However, no
matter how unpleasant it may be for Russia, the USA has the last word.
Thus, most likely in Saint Petersburg there will be signed just
another transient document, meant for the Armenian and Azerbaijani
societies and likely to be proofread during the visit of the US
President to Moscow. If Medvedev and Obama come to an agreement on
redistribution of influence spheres without bloodshed, the regulation
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be said to be once again postponed
till better time. The only thing that can shuffle the maps is the
probable normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations contrary to the
Russian scenario.
ANC SPOKESPERSON: RPA IS NO LONGER ABLE TO OVERCOME MINIMUM BARRIER IN ELECTIONS
Noyan Tapan
May 25, 2009
YEREVAN, MAY 25, NOYAN TAPAN. If the authorities commit falsifications
on the day of Yerevan Council of Elders elections, the opposition
will be able to fight them, but it will be difficult to fight if
unbridled and violent actions are done. Armenian National Congress
(ANC) Spokesperson Arman Musinian expressed such an opinion at the May
25 press conference. "If a group of 50 people consisting of National
Security Service employees, special detachments representatives,
district authoritative persons, skin-heads enter a polling station
and if they destroy and smash everything, beat proxies, it will not
be easy either for us or for them," the Spokesperson said.
Estimating ANC’s rating, A. Musinian said that the bloc enjoys 60-65%
sympathy of voters and if fair elections are held, the Congress will
have a prevailing majority in Yerevan Council of Elders. According to
his formulation, if the elections are rigged, the pro-governmental
forces will form "as untidy coalition" as the current ruling
coalition. A. Musinian said that while ANC is holding crowded and
active electoral rallies, criminal retributions take place inside
the coalition.
Touching upon ARFD, the ANC Spokesperson said that Congress has
not seen a step by ARFD yet that would prove the latter’s being
opposition. As to the Republican Party of Armenia, according to
A. Musinian’s estimation, "that party is no longer able to overcome
elections minimum barrier." In his words, the Bargavach Hayastan
(Prosperous Armenia) party has a bit bigger chance to succeed and
the Orinats Yerkir (Country of Law) "is a non-serious subject."
In Lebanon’s Patchwork, a Focus on Armenians’ Political Might
By ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: May 25, 2009
BEIRUT, Lebanon – Their political apparatus is a model of
discipline. Their vast array of social services is a virtual state
within a state. Their enemies accuse them of being pawns of Syria and
Iran.
They are the Armenian Christians of Lebanon, one of the Middle East’s
most singular and least-understood communities. And if they sound a
bit like Hezbollah, the Shiite militant group based here, that is no
accident.
Last month, the main Armenian political bloc decided to support
Hezbollah’s alliance in the coming parliamentary elections in Lebanon
against the pro-American parliamentary majority. Because of their role
as a crucial swing vote, the Armenians could end up deciding who wins
and who loses in what is often described as a proxy battle between
Iran, Hezbollah’s patron, and the West.
That fact has brought new attention to the Armenians, a distinct and
borderless ethnic group that is spread throughout the region much as
the Jews once were. In Lebanon, they have their own schools, hospitals
and newspapers.
They speak their own language, with its own alphabet. Their main
political party, Tashnaq, operates in 35 countries and has a secretive
world committee that meets four times a year. Their collective memory
of the genocide carried out against them in Turkey from 1915 to 1918
helps maintain their identity in a far-flung diaspora.
`There is a sense of invisible nationhood across borders,’
said Paul Haidostian, the president of Haigazian University, the
Armenian university in Beirut.
In fact, their political enemies here accuse the Armenians of siding
with Hezbollah in order to protect the substantial Armenian
populations in Syria and Iran. But the Armenian political leadership
says it is fully independent and has no ideological sympathy for
either of Lebanon’s two main political camps.
Instead, the Armenians say, they are voting with the opposition for
reasons that are entirely local and pragmatic: it offered them full
control over the parliamentary seats in Armenian-dominated
districts. The other side did not, said Hovig Mekhitarian, the
chairman of the Lebanese branch of Tashnaq.
`We want candidates who represent our community,’ Mr. Mekhitarian
said. `We are not with the opposition, and not with the majority.’
That dynamic is common enough in Lebanon, a checkerboard of mutually
suspicious sectarian groups that are usually more concerned with
protecting their own interests than with advancing any broader
national or regional agenda.
But even in Lebanon, the Armenians stand out for their
independence. During the 1975-1990 civil war, the Armenians refused to
take sides. Tashnaq discouraged its members from leaving the country
(though many Armenians did leave), in deference to Lebanese
patriotism. Officially, the party is socialist, but its only real
credo is survival.
Mr. Haidostian said: `I remember when I used to get stopped at a
checkpoint, they would ask, `Are you Christian or Muslim?’ I
would say `Armenian,’ and it was like a third category. They didn’t
know what to do.’
Despite the risks, many Armenians say they find Lebanon a uniquely
accommodating place, largely because its weak state allows them to
live almost as a separate nation. `There is something tentative about
Lebanese identity, and in that questioning Armenians have found a
comfortable space,’ Mr. Haidostian said.
Although there have been Armenians here for centuries, they first came
in large numbers after the genocide. Later wars and crises led to more
migration, increasing the size of the Lebanese Armenian community to
240,000 by the 1970s. The creation of the independent state of Armenia
in 1918 had provided refuge to some, but its small size and role as a
Soviet client state after 1920 set limits on its role as an Armenian
homeland.
In Lebanon, the Armenians had an unusual mix of freedom and
insecurity, allowing them to practice their religion and culture, but
also limiting their assimilation into the general culture. In the
United States, Armenians often marry outside their group and are less
likely to speak their own language; here, they remain far more
distinct.
The Beirut neighborhood of Bourj Hamoud is a kind of miniature
Armenia, with shop signs written in Armenian script and a dense,
familial culture of working-class shops, homes and restaurants. The
Lebanese branch of Tashnaq is based there, flying the party’s
distinctive banner bearing a pen, a shovel and a dagger – representing
ideology, work and struggle. There is also a rich network of schools,
orphanages, retirement homes and hospitals. Schoolchildren learn three
languages (and three different alphabets), and start on a fourth
language in the fourth grade.
Maintaining this independence requires political skill. During the
civil war, Bourj Hamoud was trapped geographically between Christian
and Palestinian areas, and its leaders had to work hard to avoid
becoming a target for either side.
Recently, that neutrality has been difficult to preserve. Tashnaq has
long been a de facto Syrian ally, partly because of Syria’s former
military domination of Lebanon. After the Syrian withdrawal in 2005,
it remained in the Syrian political camp, mainly because it blamed the
other side for an electoral law that divided Armenian districts and
reduced its power.
This spring, Saad Hariri, the leader of the pro-American parliamentary
majority, tried to mend fences with Tashnaq, which controls the vast
majority of Armenian votes. He had good reason: last year the
electoral law was revised in a way that restored the Armenians’ power.
Lebanese Christians represent the swing vote in this election, and the
160,000-strong Armenian community is by far the most unified subgroup
of those votes. If Mr. Hariri could have persuaded Tashnaq to vote
with him, the balance might have tipped in his favor to defeat
Hezbollah and its allies.
He did not succeed. Mr. Mekhitarian said Mr. Hariri had not offered
enough. `He was really only offering one seat, and he wanted our
support in 15 other seats,’ Mr. Mekhitarian said.
Members of Mr. Hariri’s party who took part in the negotiations
offered a slightly different account. They said Mr. Hariri offered to
satisfy Tashnaq’s demands on parliamentary seats, but only if the
party would commit firmly to supporting him before and after the
elections. It would not do so, they said.
That is not surprising. In a sense, the Armenians cannot afford to
make such political commitments. Like the Druse and other minorities
in Lebanon, they believe they must subordinate all ideological
principles to a nimble defense of their community.
Dilijan’s Impulse is leading the First League of Football
23.05.2009 15:36 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ 7th tournament of the national football First league
of Armenia has finished. Leading Dilijan’s Impulse, despite its first
draw in the 7th tournament, continues heading the tournament table.
Results of the 7th tournament:
Shengavit – Impuls – 1:1
Goals: Hovhannes Mnatsakanyan – 34 minute (Shengavit), Arman Minasyan
– 85 (Impuls),
Banants-3 – Shirak-2 – 1:2
Goals: Ararat Poghosyan – 38-pen. (Banants-3), Hayk Ishkhanyan – 26,
Vahan Hokobyan – 80 (Shirak-2)
Gandzasar-2 – Pyunik-2 – 2:1
Goals: Hayrapet Avagyan – 40, Suren Voskanyan – 55 (Gandzasar-2),
Artush Kerobyan – 59 (Pyunik-2).
Mika-2 – Banants-2 – 1:3
Goals: Gor Poghosyan – 43-pen (Mika-2), Gevorg Ohanyan – 13, Gor
Gugujian – 28, Narek Gyozalyan – 66 (Banants-2)
Standings after 7th tournaments:
1. Impuls – 16 scores
2 Shirak-2 – 12
3. Shengavit – 11
4. Banants-2 – 10
5. Pyunik-2 – 10
6. Gandzasar-2 – 10
7. Mika-2 – 5
8. Pyunik -3 – 2
9. Banants-3 – 2
Turkish FM leaves for Baku
23.05.2009 16:43 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ After a two-day event in Damask, Turkish FM Ahmed
Davidoglu will leave for Baku along with his Azeri counterpart Elmar
Mammadyarov. Two Foreign Ministers are expected to discuss
Nagorno-Karabakh problem, natural gas prices and Armenian-Turkish ties
normalization, Turkish Hurriyet Daily News reports.
Areximbank continues expanding its branch network
23.05.2009 16:53 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ New ‘Charents’ branch of Areximbank will start
operating soon in Yerevan along with recently opened branches in
Armavir, Artashat and Abovian. The new branch will provide services to
ArmRosgazprom office.
Areximbank has 15 offices at the moment, 9 out of which are regional.
The Armenian-Russian Export-Import Bank was established in 1998 to
support the entrepreneurship and manage the financial flows between
Russia and Armenia.
The bank is the principal member of VISA International and Master Card
International payment systems, and the member of SWIFT system.
>From October 2006 the bank participates in the German KfW bank
program `Stable Development of the Mortgage Market’.
In August 2005, the Moscow Impexbank acquired 19,91% shares of
Areximbank.
On November 29 of 2007, Gazprombank (Open Joint Stock Company), having
received the approval of the Central Bank of the Republic of Armenia,
acquired the control package of Areximbank CJSC shares.
Information on the share-holders, having considerable participation in
Areximbank CJSC, their names, the volume of their participation:
Gazprombank OJSC – 80,0854000%, Raiffeisenbank CJSC – 19,9146000%
On April 31 of 2009 Areximbank’s aggregate capital amounted AMD 9 693
967 thousand, assets made AMD 38 598 937 thousand and liabilities –
AMD 28 904 970 thousand.
ARMENIAN MINISTERS MEET WITH DE HOOP SCHEFFER
Interfax
May 21 2009
Russia
Armenia’s Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandian and Defense Minister
Seiran Ohanian had a meeting in Brussels with NATO Secretary General
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Armenian Foreign Ministry said.
The ministers and De Hoop Scheffer discussed "Armenia-NATO cooperation
under the Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) and the Partnership
for Peace program," the ministry told Interfax.
IPAPs are open to countries seeking closer relations with NATO and
capable of building closer ties with the alliance.
Nalbandian and Ohanian attended a meeting of the North Atlantic
Council in Brussels on Wednesday.
The Council credited Armenia with having made good progress in
implementing its IPAP and expressed support for Armenian moves to
improve Armenian-Turkish relations.
Nalbandian briefed the Council on Armenia’s foreign policy priorities,
on efforts to bridge rifts between Armenia and Turkey and on work
being done to settle the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the Armenian
ministry said.
Ohanian spoke about Armenia’s current security and defense reforms.
THE ROADMAP TO NORMALIZATION IS A ROADMAP TO OBLIVION FOR ARMENIA
By Michael Mensoian
admap-to-normalization-is-a-roadmap-to-oblivion-fo r-armenia/
May 22, 2009
The "roadmap to normalization" is a roadmap to oblivion for
Armenia. Secrecy in the ongoing negotiations may be necessary, but
given the advantage that Turkey enjoys and the strident comments
made by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Abdullah Gul,
and the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Babacan, the only
conclusion that can be reached is that the negotiations are not
beneficial for Armenia.
Turkey still persists in demanding preconditions which, if accepted,
would be a tacit admission by Yerevan that genocide recognition and
Nagorno-Karabakh’s continued independence will not stand in the way
of normalizing relations. For sure, Turkey will not budge on the
genocide issue and will not forsake its ally Azerbaijan. Both Ankara
and Washington know that Russia is standing in the wings ready to do
whatever it can to bring Azerbaijan within its orbit. The Nabucco gas
pipeline project has evidently been approved by all participating
nations. Eventually, gas supplies from Central Asia will be pumped
beneath the Caspian Sea to be sent through this pipeline to the
European Union. Armenia will have no part to play in this new economic
endeavor. Having a fairly accurate sense as to what normalization
may cost Armenia, what are the benefits that Yerevan believes it
may obtain?
The opening of the border will result in a significant increase
in traffic. Unfortunately, it will primarily be a one-way flow of
goods from Turkey to Armenia. How Armenia, with its US $18 billion
Gross Domestic Product (GDP), expects to compete with Turkey’s US
$800 billion GDP is difficult to imagine. Eventually, Armenia will
not only become part of the Turkish domestic market, but it will be
dependent upon Turkey for much of its manufactured goods. A related
development could well be a rise in unemployment and a decrease in
productivity since Turkey is better positioned to expand its production
facilities and attract the necessary labor. In addition, a real
possibility exists for Armenian entrepreneurs to migrate to Turkey,
where economic opportunity should be greater than in Armenia. Given
the volume and variety of goods stamped "made in Turkey" that will
flood the Armenian market, there will be an imbalance of payment
situation-with Turkey becoming the creditor nation. There are few
goods or commodities produced in Armenia that are not produced in
greater quantities in Turkey, which limits any significant flow of
traffic from Armenia to Turkey. Is this what Yerevan believes will be
a benefit derived from normalization? Within a relatively short time,
the Armenian dram would most likely lose its value as the currency
of choice, being replaced by the Turkish lira.
Any potential the Armenian economy currently has would be limited
since its development will be determined by Turkish entrepreneurs
who will be influenced by Ankara’s political objectives vis-a-vis
Yerevan. Normalization will not remove the existing impediments
hampering the Armenian economy. Of greater importance, potential
initiatives that are vital if Armenia’s economy is to develop will
be hampered by its economic domination by Turkey.
Politically, Armenia will retain its independent status. However, its
initiatives in the international arena will be influenced by Ankara. To
borrow a term from the distant past, the president of Armenia will be
no better than a satrap. With respect to Nagorno-Karabakh (historic
Artsakh), its future will be bleak. As a precondition, Armenia is
being asked to sacrifice the de facto independence of its brothers
and sisters. This would be a travesty should Yerevan agree. The 7,000
azatamartiks (freedom-fighters) are no less martyrs than the 1,500,000
innocent Armenian men, women, and children who were slaughtered during
the genocide carried out by the Ottoman Turkish government and the
Ataturk Turkish government. Can there be any justification for Yerevan
abandoning Karabakh? For abandoning the martyrs of the genocide?
In 15 years, the Karabakhtsis have overcome obstacles that many thought
were insurmountable. They have developed a democratic government
while Azerbaijan maintains a Soviet-style autocratic government. In
1923, Armenia had no say when the Bolsheviks forced the separation
of historic Armenian Artsakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. To allow
Artsakh to revert to Azeri control again is unconscionable. This may
well be the moment when it is absolutely necessary for Armenia to
decide whether it will become a compliant neighbor or accept the
challenge, daunting as it may be, to protect its future and the
independence of Artsakh as well. One may say this is easier said
than done. Agreed. However, normalization will reduce Armenia to a
vassal state. How will this differ from the Soviet Socialist Republic
of Armenia?
No one should fail to see the duplicitous nature of United States
foreign policy with respect to Armenia. The present Democrat
administration supports Turkey’s entry into the European Union. It
suggests that Turkey should have a role in bringing the Karabakh
conflict to an end. It supports the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. And just recently, aid to Armenia in the budget year for
2010 was reduced while aid to Azerbaijan was increased. As it is said,
when you know that the cards are stacked against you, only the fool
continues to play.
Leaders of our advocacy organizations have misread the political
landscape once again. The emotional issue of genocide recognition
is not the battle that should be fought at this time. While the
Armenian Caucus is working diligently to line up additional support
for the genocide resolution, the "war" for Armenia’s future and
that of Karabakh is being lost in the international arena. It is
conceivable in the Machiavellian world of international politics for
the genocide resolution to be passed by the United States Congress
and reluctantly signed by President Obama, accompanied by an innocuous
statement that Turkey would condemn with the proper amount of public
indignation. Washington and Ankara could well have discussed this
possibility notwithstanding the usual pressure from the pro-Turkish
lobbying organizations. The price Turkey would extract from the Obama
Administration would be its support in the ongoing negotiations
with Armenia and the return of Karabakh to Azerbaijan. This would
be Turkey’s reward while the geo-strategic interests of the United
States would be served.
With limited political capital, the Armenian advocacy organization
in the United States must speak with a unified voice and pick the
single battle it will fight. Genocide recognition is not the battle
that should be fought at this time. The efforts of the Congressional
Armenian Caucus must be utilized in more effective ways to bring
immediate economic and military benefits to Armenia and to Karabakh.
How the negotiations leading to normalization will eventually play out
can only be inferred from the public statements by Turkish leaders and
the foreign policy of the United States. Once Armenia has accepted the
conditions necessary for normalization, or whatever euphemistic term
that may be substituted, Yerevan will have no valid reason to believe
that Ankara will be motivated or even have the need to consider the
legitimate issues that have separated the two countries. And what of
those countries that have recognized the Armenian Genocide? Will they
support Armenia, once normalization has been achieved, as it seeks
to have Turkey consider the legitimate claims requiring restitution,
reparation, rectification, and yes, recognition. Definitely not.
Normalization is the end of Hai Tahd and it is the end for the justice
that generations of Armenians have worked to achieve. Let’s not say
this is a pessimistic view because it doesn’t comport with what we want
to believe. It is an objective assessment of the situation based on
the available evidence. Let us all hope that Yerevan will realize that
normalization is not a panacea for the Armenian nation. If anything, it
is detrimental to Armenia’s national interests and its future security.
DEFENSE MINISTER: THE CONTINUATION OF OCCUPATION OF AZERBAIJAN’S TERRITORY WILL MAKE UNWANTED PROCESSES IN THE REGION INEVITABLE
Today.Az
tics/52474.html
May 21 2009
Azerbaijan
The US-Azerbaijan cooperation in the military sphere is developing
successfully, said Azerbaijani Defense Minister, Colonel General Safar
Abiyev Thursday during a meeting with the commander of U.S. Armed
Forces in Europe, General John Craddock.
Referring to the evolving situation in the region, the Minister said
that until the Armenian armed forces leave the occupied territories
of Azerbaijan, the apparent tension in the region will further,
and as the opportunities for the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh
conflict will be exhausted.
Therefore, according to S. Abiev, Europe and the OSCE Minsk Group
should reinforce measures on Armenia, otherwise, unwanted processes
are inevitable.
Craddock, in turn, also noted the importance of addressing tensions
in the region. He praised the contribution made by Azerbaijan in the
international security system and the participation of Azerbaijani
servicemen in peacekeeping operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and,
until recently, in Kosovo.