Category: News

Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 24, 2003
CONFERENCE ENDED
The June 19 meeting of the Armenian Conference of Parliamentarian
Friendship discussed a number of questions concerning not only
Armenia but also the countries represented at the conference. Also
the economic and social state of those countries were presented. A
number of questions regarding NKR were discussed, including problems
of exchange of information. NKR National Assembly speaker Oleg
Yessayan presented the present economic condition of Artsakh to the
representatives of European countries and particularly mentioned that
every country of the post-soviet period faced two rather complicated
and interrelated problems after the declaration of independence. The
first of these problems, according to Oleg Yessayan, is formation of
the national economy after the dissolution of the economy, and the
second is to maintain the transition of the national economy into the
model of market economy. The NKR NA speaker stated that the military
and political situation in which years ago the economy of this small
country was formed naturally caused a number of serious
complications. However, today the picture is completely different.
With the assistance of the Republic of Armenia the people and the
government managed to achieve economic reforms. `The GDP in our
country only in 2003 increased by 19.8 percent.’ The average salary
in Artsakh totals over 60 US dollars. According to Oleg Yessayan, if
compared to the rates 10 years ago the average salary certainly grew
10 times. As to the development of business, the speaker of NKR
parliament emphasized that favourable conditions have been provided
in our country for foreign investments. According to the NKR
legislation, absolutely the same conditions work for all investors
but with more privileges for the foreign investors. Thus, in case of
investing 50 thousand dollars and more in the first three year the
investor is exempted from all taxes except for the pension fund
payments. Drawing the attention of the foreign members of parliament,
Mr. Yessayan mentioned that Artsakh has all the favourable conditions
for development of economy of the country as well as the growth of
business of foreign businessmen, which is favourable for both the
businessman and the development of independent Artsakh. For example
he mentioned that during the past four years the total volume of
foreign investments exceeded 40 million dollars, which is a serious
number for a country with 150 thousand population. During the meeting
the staff of the conference was also confirmed. The speaker of the
National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia Artur Baghdassarian was
elected chairman of the Conference. Six committees were formed.
According to Artur Baghdassarian, the conference will pursue the
settlement of the problems that Armenia and the Armenian nation face,
as well as represent the interests of Armenia and friendly countries
in different international parliamentary organizations. The first
plenary meeting of the Armenian Conference of Parliamentarian
Friendship closed under the hymn of Armenia. The next meeting will
take place next year, however it has not been decided yet in which
country. Speaker of the National Assembly of Armenia Artur
Baghdassarian considered it appropriate to hold it in Armenia not
refusing invitations from Nagorni Karabakh, Russia and Ukraine. The
delegates of these countries expressed their wish to hold the next
meetings in their countries. And before that the six committees will
discuss and work out the problems for the settlement of which this
unprecedented organization was founded.
CHRISTINE MNATSAKANIAN

Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 24, 2003
NO ONE-SIDED CONCESSIONS
On the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the cease-fire the public
undertaking `Defence of Liberated Territories’ in Yerevan published a
report. The authors of the report think that the negotiations for the
regulation of the Karabakh conflict have reached a deadlock and it is
time to make changes. The report says, `Although the cease-fire was
maintained the diplomatic war goes on.’ The mentioned public
organization informed journalists about this during the seminar on
June 19. `The past years were enough to make it clear that the
international regulation of the Artsakh issue is not its settlement
but the continuation of the war through diplomatic means,’ says the
report. According to the representatives of the public undertaking
`Defence of Liberated Territories’, returning the liberated
territories or part of them is the main problem discussed at the
negotiation, and if it is fulfilled, it will mean serious
reconsideration of the results of the war not in favour of Armenia.
According to the authors of the report, `the current situation has
two solutions: either the liberated territories are fixed in our
consciousness as motherland, populated and made part of the Armenian
state or are merely considered temporarily occupied territories for
the aim of security and estranged sooner or later.’ The settlement of
the Karabakh conflict is related to the problem of telecommunication
and refugees. The authors of the report think that because of the
long-lasting and fruitless negotiations we have appeared in a
deadlock and live under the threat of the imposed one-sided
concession. The director of the undertaking thinks that the policy of
the current government does not differ from the former. The core
principle of the both is willingness for concessions. `The only
difference perhaps is that if the former authorities expressed their
willingness for concessions in plain text, the present government
tries to postpone, not to make that step under different pressuresâ=80¦’
This is, of course, the opinion of the director of the undertaking.
And in order not to mislead the reader, we consider it necessary to
quote one of the representatives of the authorities, vice speaker of
the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia Vahan Hovhannissian.
Recently in an interview in answer to the question of the journalist
whether it is possible to make pressure on the government of Armenia
and impose a non-favourable variant in reference to the Karabakh
problem, and under the foreign pressure Armenian will make one-sided
concessions, Mr. Hovhannissian said, `No, because Armenia is an
independent country and it is difficult to whitewash. We also have
eyes abroad.’ Of course, this is not the only argument and more
similar statements of representatives of the present authorities of
Armenia can be enumerated but this is not our task. Our task is to
agree to the healthy idea of the representatives of the public
organization `Defence of Liberated Territories’ that the position of
each conscious Armenian must be that all the liberated regions are an
indivisible part of Armenia and cannot be surrendered to the
strangers or become subject of negotiation bargaining. The speaker of
the National Assembly of NKR Oleg Yessayan said, `For a divided
nation the consistent accomplishment of its integrity must be a law.â=80=9D
And this integrity must not merely be physical but ideological and,
of course, determined, which is more important. With ideological
integrity we may state confidently that we will manage to achieve our
aims. Although as the participants of the seminar mentioned, `Today
Azerbaijan is not ready to admit and sign an agreement recognizing
the right of the Armenians to live free and have self-governance on
the land of Artsakh’, this is a matter of time. And the sooner our
integrity is maintained, the sooner we will manage with the
participation of our as well as a number of European organization
dealing with the Artsakh issue to make our neighbour Azerbaijan
recognize the dominance of Artsakh on the territory which Artsakh
controls de facto as well as recognize that the Republic of Nagorni
Karabakh is a self-governing state and never was and can be part of
independent Azerbaijan.
CHRISTINE MNATSAKANIAN.

Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 24, 2003
MASS MEDIA – PART OF DEMOCRATIZATION
The topic of the training `Mass Media During Elections’ held in
Stepanakert last week (organized by Stepanakert Press Club with the
assistance of the international organization `Article 19′) was not
only the role of the mass media during elections but also in the
process of democratization of the society in general. The mass media,
as one of the conductors of the training noticed, is like litmus
paper indicating the level of democratization of the society. On the
topic of the role of the mass media in the democratization of the
society and the practical implementation of this role in Ukraine and
Armenia we talked to the conductors of the conference Alexey Koshel
and Elina Poghosbekian.
THE MARKET OF FREE MASS MEDIA IS NOT COMPLETELY FORMED IN UKRAINE.
Alexey Koshel, expert of the international organization `Article 19′,
deputy chairman ofthe non-governmental organization `Committee of
Voters of Ukraine’. – Mr. Koshel, what changes took place in the life
of your society after independence and to what extent are they
principal? – I should say that the transition to new market
relationships is painful not only in our country but in the entire
post-soviet territory. And this is natural. The old always yields
hardly. Principal changes, however, happened. This refers first of all
to the process of democratization of the process of elections. The
second is the publication of the work of the government agencies. Each
citizen has the opportunity to read in the mass media and online the
texts of the speeches in the parliament and government meetings, the
results of voting. The third is structuring of the political processes
in the country the evidence to which is the institute of the
elections, transition of the mass media to market relationships,
freedom of moving, freedom in economy, religion and other spheres. –
During the training you told that governmental mass media should not
exist. Why? And what is the situation of the mass media in Ukraine? –
Governmental mass media cost too expensive to the state budget. 1600
journalists work on the TV and radio of Ukraine. And the largest
private TV channel has 200 journalists even with a greater volume of
work. By the way, these companies are going to make their work more
optimal reducing the number of journalists to 80. I think the numbers
say everything. Today in our country the governmental mass media are
a TV and radio channel and two newspapers which mainly publish state
documents. Among these there are also regional mass media, usually
with too big staff and little circulation. 80 percent of the mass
media are private, the largest are `Facti’ (800 thousand copies),
`Selskie Vesti’ (514 copies), `Vechernie Vesti’ (430 thousand) and a
great number of newspapers with little circulation. In brief,
economically the governmental mass media are not optimal. These should
be replaced by the public mass media. – Closing the training you said
that independent mass media in fact do not exist and these are
considerably dependent on those on whose expense they exist. – If
there are no objective mass media, consequently there is no objective
monitoring? – Yes, independent, therefore objective mass media do not
exist but this does not mean that we should not fight for
accomplishment of at least relatively independent mass media. In
Ukraine this process lasted for 10 years. The Ukrainian private mass
media already know that by disrespectful attitude they may lose their
readers and thus their source of funding. I may state with all
responsibility that there is, nevertheless, relative independence of
the mass media in Ukraine.
SITUATION CHANGED LITTLE.
Elina Poghosbekian, editor of the bulletin of Yerevan Press Club. –
What is the situation of the mass media in Armenia in terms of the
past decade? – After the declaration of independence up today the
situation changed little. And this is conditioned by the fact that the
mass media in Armenia are in great dependence on the political
forces. – Will it go on like that? Which is the way out? – In the
Soviet period the situation was much worse, presently the situation is
better. The way out, in my opinion, is financial independence and
profitability as an economic entity. Today this is very difficult in
the conditions of Armenia. The circulation of the newspapers is
small. Most of the population lives in poverty and purchasing ability
is law, even the small circulation newspapers are sold with
difficulty. I think you are acquainted with this problem. It is
possible to acquire money from advertisement but this is not much for
the same reason that the society is not rich. As long as the mass
media cannot step on their own feet, as long as the legislative sphere
is not accomplished, it is easy to make pressure on the mass media, as
it happened with the 24 hour oppositionist channel A1+. – They say the
mass media are the reflection of the society. To what extent do the
mass media of Armenia reflect the process of democratization and how
can they affect that process? – This is a complicated process for the
progress of which first of all our willpower is important. The
European assistance to our society in democratization is little: we
must first set the aim to achieve it. If at the beginning of the 90’s
the mass media were entirely under the influence of political forces
in the result of which they lost all the best qualities, at the end of
the 90’s and the beginning of the next decade the situation got more
or less better. Among positive changes I would mention the cooperation
of Yerevan Press Club with the Union of Journalists of Armenia
(actually a half-governmental organization), as well as `Internews
Armenia’ and the committee for protection of journalists. This
cooperation enabled to smooth the decision of closing down the channel
A1+, organize protest meetings connected with the bill `On the mass
media’ worked out by the Ministry of Justice after which amendments
were made to the joint project. At the second reading it already
corresponded to the international standards. The work on the third
reading was pure editing and in December the parliament adopted the
bill. There were unhappy attempts to affect the parliament. The above
mentioned organizations tried to oppose to the introduction of
regressive changes in the law `On television and radio’ but in
vain. Today we are attempting to set forth an amendment which would
allow to move the punishment for libel and offence from the criminal
to the civil code (fine instead imprisonment). – During trainings much
was said about the code of ethics of journalists. Are the rules of
ethics kept by the journalists? – Unfortunately we have little in this
sphere to be proud of. The code of ethics of journalists was adopted
by certain mass media and public organizations working in this
sphere. The adoption of the code is actually one of the ways of
self-regulation. However the unwritten laws of the fourth branch of
power have greater force than the written ones. And this is the
reflection of the actual state of the society. The more the rights of
each individual of the society are honoured, the more the journalists
will honour the written laws.
SUSANNA BALAYAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Baku Today
June 25 2004
KLO Activists Get Two Months in Jail for Their Anti-Armenian Action
Baku’s Nasimi District court on Thursday sentenced five jailed
activists of the Karabakh Liberation Organization (KLO) to two months
in jail for their unauthorized protest action against Armenian
participation of a Baku-hosted NATO conference.
The KLO chairman Akif Naghi, along with four other activists of his
organization, Mursal Hasanov, Ilkin Qurbanov, Rovshan Fatiyev and
Manaf Kerimov, were found culpable of resisting police, violating
public order and hooliganism.
The KLO members on Tuesday protested Armenian participants of the
planning conference for NATO’s `Cooperative Best Effort-2004′
exercises, Col. Murad Isakhanyan and Sen. Lt. Aram Hovhanesyan, by
breaking into a conference hall of Baku’s Grand Hotel Europe, where
the event was taking place.
As a result, the conference was stopped for several minutes.
Several windows of the conference hall of the hotel were broken by
the protestors and there was no report of serious injuries on police
or KLO activists during the incident.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

armenianow.com
25 June 2004
Fruitful Season of Film: First international festival to begin this week
By Gayane Abrahamyan ArmeniaNow arts reporter From June 30-July 4, Armenia
will host its first international film festival.
The “Golden Apricot” International Film Festival comes during a year when
Armenia’s real apricot crop is questionable, but festival organizers are
promising a fertile cultural event.
The idea of carrying out an international film festival in Armenia has been
on cinematographers’ mind for many years, but the ambitious step was taken
by movie director Harutyun Khachatryan, the chairman of Armenian Association
of Film Critics and Cinema Journalists Susanna Harutyunyan and film critic
Michael Stamboltsyan.
..
“First, this step of ours seemed to be insanity, since to carry out such a
festival at least $2.5 million are needed. Anyway, thanks to joint efforts
we created a ridiculous budget of $100 thousand, we found people who
believed in us and as you see the goal became true,” says Khachatryan, the
director of the festival.
According to Khachatryan film is one of the basic tools of art, through
which one can show the world the country’s history, its art and culture.
“If before there were five countries in the world that didn’t have a film
festival, Armenia was one of them. This is funny and it’s a shame,”
Khachatryan adds.
Fifty filmmakers from 20 countries will take part in the festival.
Fifty-five films will be shown in five competitions and 30, hors concours.
Prizes will be awarded for: Best Full Length Fiction; Best Short Fiction;
Best Documentary; Best Animation or Experimental; and Best Student Film.
The jury for the festival will consist of cinematography specialists of
international repute, including: Massimo de Grandi (Italy), president of
International Association of Film Unions; Ally Derks the director of
Amsterdam International Film Festival,; Kirill Razlogov project director of
Moscow International Film Festival, Swedish movie director Gunar Bergdahl
and others.
Three retrospective programs will be carried out during the festival
dedicated to Armenian Film, and to Sergei Parajanov’s and Charles Aznavor’s
80th anniversaries. New Russian, Swedish, German, Bulgarian and Italian
movies will be shown under the title Yerevan Premieres.
The movies will be shown at Moscow and Nairi movie theatres, and a press
center will organize press conferences each day, as well as meetings with
cinematographers in order to present completely the works of the film
festival.
“The main purpose of the festival is to bring art movies to Armenia, which
create a desire to think, to philosophize, to connect with real art,” says
Khachatryan. “Our youth doesn’t see anything but the American movies, we
need to bring up a new movie audience.”
Financing for the festival is being underwritten by the Union of
Manufacturers and Businessmen of Armenia.
“This is the first serious attempt to make Armenia a country of
international culture. Maybe this very festival will give a new life and
spirit to our art,” says the President of the Union of Businessmen Arsen
Ghazaryan. “A face of a country is its culture; let us help ourselves not to
lose that face.”
For more information about the festival see

armenianow.com
25 June 2004
Guilty?: Opposition leader sentenced to 18 months
By Vahan Ishkhanyan ArmeniaNow reporter
A court in the Armavir Region has sentenced political leader Lavrenti
Kirakosyan to 18 months in prison on drug charges. Human rights activists
and political opposition leaders say Kirakosyan, regional head of the
National Democratic Union, was framed by police who planted drugs in his
home during a search, and that his arrest was for political reasons.
In reaching its decision, the court relied on testimony of five policemen,
while disregarding the testimony of two civilian search witnesses whose
testimony implied that police placed marijuana in Kirakosyan’s home.
As previously reported in ArmeniaNow, Kirakosyan was arrested April 10,
during a political protest. He was sentenced to 10 days in jail for failure
to obey a police order. Two hours before he was to be released, police were
sent to search his home, on suspicion that he was holding weapons for
acquaintances who were suspected of a crime.
His lawyer confers with Kirakosyan in court
No weapons were found. A second search was ordered, after which police
produced 59 grams of marijuana they said was found atop a water heater in
Kirakosyan’s home.
Policeman Mnatsakan Mnatsakanyan testified that he found the marijuana.
“We finished the search. When we were going to leave the building he (deputy
head of the police department) told me to check the water heater, because I
am tall,” Mnatsakanyan said. “I heard someone had tried, but was too short
to reach it.”
(Witnesses of the search say the first policeman who checked the water
heater is in fact appreciably taller that Mnatsakanyan.)
Police contradicted their own testimony. For instance, some of them said
after searching the water heater for the first time they searched the whole
house, roof and yard and in the end again searched the water heater and only
after that they found marijuana. Another policeman said they had searched
the water heater two times without intervals.
Search witness Misha Shmavonyan said a plastic vase was found in the same
location as the drugs and that the vase was covered in dust, while the
package holding the marijuana was clean – a suggestion that the drugs had
been placed there moments earlier.
(Police dogs were used in the search, but did not detect the drugs.)
A policeman took photographs of the search, but testified that the film has
been damaged and no photos are available.
Shmavonyan and another search witness, Gevorg Gevorgyan, say they were
forced by police to sign statements verifying the search. Shmavonyan also
testified that police had come to his home to try to persuade him to not
appear as a witness at the trial.
A urine sample was taken from Kirakosyan during his detention and traces of
marijuana was found in his blood. However, prior to the specimen being
taken, Kirakosyan had become ill after eating food prepared in the jail and
claims that the drug was cooked into the food he was given. A doctor treated
Kirakosyan.
The court refused Kirakosyan’s attorney Vardan Zurnachyan’s motion to call
the doctor as a witness.
Residents from Kirakosyan’s village of Karakert, filled the court for his
trial. Some among the 600 residents wrote letters praising Kriakosyan’s
civil service. One said he is a man who others call even for settling
marital disputes.
“He always helps people and struggles for justice,” wrote villager Lavrenti
Safaryan. “I will tell you a story that happened two days before he was sent
to prison. I was in Ikarus (a type of bus). There is a sick woman in the
village, she is helpless. She was suffering from complication of her arm.
Lavrenti helped her to get into the Ikarus, took her to hospital, made
doctors treat her and brought her back. He paid for her bus ticket and told
the driver, ‘next time don’t take money from this woman’.”
The court was filled with supporters from Karakert
For his part, Kirakosyan stated he has been subjected to political
persecutions for several years. In 1996 he was sentenced to six months of
imprisonment on charges, he claims, that were also fabricated, and again
following his protest of presidential elections.
Kirakosyan testified that during detention Deputy Head of Police of Armavir,
Edik Lazarian, told him that if he would promise to stop his political
activities, he would be released.
Kirakosyan said the head of the police department was asking him questions
about his political party activities and specifically wanted to know the
plans of opposition leaders Aram Sargsyan and Stepan Demirchyan. Kirakosyan
says he told police: “I am not a spy”.
Prior to the trial’s conclusion, leader of the National Democratic Union
Vazgen Manukyan held a press conference and stated that Kirakosyan is a
political prisoner and holding him violates Council of Europe mandates
regarding human rights.
“This is political matter,” Manukyan said. “They can fabricate a drug or a
murder case, however, the essence remains the same. If this case and Edgar
Arakelyan’s case (a demonstrator also convicted to 18 months for
hooliganism) are stomached, then in the future any political cases will be
turned into criminal ones.”
On the evening before the final court session Head of Police Department of
Baghramyan Region (where Kirakosyan had been held) Spartak Nahapetyan died
in a car accident.
Before making his final statement Kirakosyan asked participants of the trial
and those present in the courtroom to rise and have a minute of silence in
memory of the Head of Police Department.
Then Kirakosyan said his case is an ordered hearing and real criminals are
policemen who had fabricated the charges.
“This trial is an exceptional demonstration of dictatorship,” Kirakosyan
told the court. “However, it is well known that sooner or later all
dictatorships collapse.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

CENN – June 25, 2004 Daily Digest – Armenia
Table of Contents:
1. EU freezing 100m euros aid to Armenia re refusal to shut down ANPP
2. Germany to help Armenia improve water supplies
3. Armenia, Iran Boost Energy Cooperation
4. Germany to provide fresh loans to Armenia
5. Armenia hopes for Iranian credit to build hydro plant
1. EU freezing 100m euros aid to Armenia re refusal to shut down
ANPP
Source: Bellona, UK, June 23, 2004
EU is freezing 100m euros of aid to Armenia after refusal to shut down its
nuclear plant.
“Our position of principle is that nuclear power plants should not be built
in highly active seismic zones,” stated Alexis Loeber, head of the EU’s
delegation in Armenia. The European Union, as part of its general policy
seeking the closure of elderly nuclear plants constructed in territories of
the former Soviet Union, agreed to give the grant aid ($122m) to Armenia for
finding alternative energy sources and for helping with decommissioning
costs at the plant. In return, the government in Yerevan would commit to a
definite date for the plant’s closure. “We cannot force Armenia to close the
plant,” says the EU’s Mr Loeber. “We feel that should definitely be well in
advance of the end of Metsamor’s design lifecycle in 2016.” The Metsamor
plant has no secondary containment facilities, a safety requirement of all
modern reactors, BBC reported.
Another concern is that due to border and railway closures with surrounding
territories, nuclear material to feed the plant is flown into Armenia from
Russia. “It is the same as flying around a potential nuclear bomb,” says Mr
Loeber. “It’s an extremely hazardous exercise.” Areg Galstyan, the country’s
deputy minister of power, says $50m has been spent on upgrading safety at
Metsamor. “It was a big mistake to shut the plant in 1988,” says Mr
Galstyan. “It created an energy crisis and the people and economy suffered.
Electricity industry specialists say that due to the expansion and updating
of existing thermal and hydro-energy plants, the country has become an
electricity exporter in recent years. A major new power source will come on
stream in 2006 when a pipeline supplying gas from neighboring Iran is due to
be completed, BBC reported.
At the same time PACE prepared four documents urging to close the station.
Despite some calls of international organizations to close the station, the
Armenian government did not respond to them. European Union many times
suggested Armenia to close Metsamor but Armenia rejected them. As a result,
European Union had to impose an economic sanction on Armenia by refusing to
allocate $100 million.
Armenian Trade Minister Chshmaritian reiterated Yerevan’s rejection of the
offer, saying that as much as $1 billion is needed for safely shutting down
Metsamor safely and putting in place an alternative source of inexpensive
energy. He added the Armenia-EU body decided to set up a working group that
will look into the issue in detail and present its findings by the end of
this year, Baku Today reports.
The Metsamor Nuclear Power plant produced 1.9 billion kilowatt hours of
electricity in 2003, or 36 percent of the total generation of electricity in
Armenia. ZAO Inter RAO UES, a subsidiary of Russia’s Unified Energy System,
and Armenia signed a contract in September 2003 to hand over trust
management of the plant to Inter RAO UES.
2. Germany to help Armenia improve water supplies
Source: Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan, June 22, 04
[Presenter] Armenian and German businessmen are preparing cooperation plans.
The Armenian side is presenting in Berlin proposals to increase the volume
of commodity turnover. Armenian legislation is more liberal on protecting
investment and ensuring economic competition.
[Correspondent Hermine Bagdasaryan from Berlin] An additional 8m euros to
improve water supplies to Armenia’s distant districts – Armenian Prime
Minister Andranik has reached this agreement with German Minister of
Economic Cooperation and Development Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul. This is not
the beginning of German support, but a continuation of several years of a
programme of improvement for the republic’s water supply, assisting small
and medium-sized businesses and developing alternative sources of energy.
Minister Zeul asked Andranik Markaryan about the Caucasus Initiative
programme, expressing concern that only Armenia and Georgia are involved in
it. Our neighbours [Azerbaijan] politicize our joint cooperation in the
ecological and economic sectors although Armenia has declared its readiness
for cooperation without any conditions, Andranik Markaryan said.
The agenda of the Armenian delegation also included economic events. More
than 200 businessmen have arrived in Berlin to take part in the
Armenian-German economic cooperation forum and industrial exhibition.
3. Armenia, Iran Boost Energy Cooperation
Source: Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan, June 21, 2004
(Presenter) The Araks river is in the focus of the Armenian-Iran
cooperation. Armenia and Iran agreed to jointly use the river’s hydro
(electrical generating) potential nine years ago. A joint commission was set
up on in 2000 and after three years a scheme to use the river has been
confirmed. The project includes the construction of two power stations, one
on Armenian and one on Iranian territory. The Armenian Energy Ministry
discussed the preparation of the joint Armenian-Iran programmes and the
issues of the construction of the Megri hydro-electric power station during
the meeting held in Syunik District.
(Correspondent over video of power grids) The preparation works on the
construction power stations on the Araks river are being completed. The
construction site has already been confirmed. The sides will sign an
agreement in two months and the station’s ground stone will be laid in
summer 2005. The power station will be constructed by Iranian financial
means, estimated at about 40m dollars. This amount we (Armenia) shall return
in the form of energy produced in the new power station. This is the third
Armenian-Iran joint project. The first one was the Armenian-Iran
high-voltage power station which was commissioned last year. The second
line’s construction followed the first one which is under construction and
will be completed in the autumn.
There are seven Armenian-Iran joint programmes in the energy industry. The
construction of the Armenian-Iran gas pipeline’ will also start soon. The
agreement has already been signed, the financial sources are being confirmed
and the preparation works are being completed. The construction of oil
processing and chemical plants are possible plans.
(Armenian Energy Minister, Armen Movsesyan, captioned) These seven
programmes which we have with Iran in the energy industry are quite large,
serious programmes. I think that all these programmes will be implemented.
(Correspondent) Apart from the security issues in the field of energy, these
programmes will also promote the development of other districts and the
resolution of social problems, in particular, employment issues.
4. Germany to provide fresh loans to Armenia
Source: ArmenPress, June 22, 2004
YEREVAN, JUNE 22, ARMENPRESS: Armenian prime minister Andranik Margarian who
has left today for Germany on a three-day working visit to participate in
German-Armenian Economic Cooperation Conference is expected to discuss with
German minister for economic cooperation and development Heidemarie
Witschorek-Zoll, who is also the German co-chairman of inter-governmental
commission for cooperation, a range of issues pertaining to German-Armenian
economic cooperation.
An agreement on release of a package of German credits to Armenia in the
next 3-4 years is supposed to be sealed in 2005. Armenian finance and
economy minister Vartan Khachatrian said today before flying to Berlin that
after the end of the visit an agreement will be signed in Yerevan on the
release of 7.5 millions German loan for the support to building of
hydro-power plants, 1.5 million of which will be allocated as a grant.
Khachatrian also said that a German KwF bank plans to release a 30 million
euros loan to Armenian for upgrading the privatized Yerevan power plant.
5. Armenia hopes for Iranian credit to build hydro plant
Source: Interfax, June 22, 2004
Armenia is hoping to receive a credit from Iran to build a hydroelectric
plant on the Araks river, the cost of which is estimated at $140 million,
Armenian Energy Minister Armen Movsisian told journalists.
He said that Armenia plans to repay the credit with supplies of electricity
to Iran.
The minister said that there are plans to build two identical hydroelectric
plants on the Araks river – the Megrin Hydroelectric Plant on Armenian
territory and the Karachilar Hydroelectric Plant in Iran. Movsisian said
that in the coming two months a feasibility study would be prepared for the
construction of Megrin Hydroelectric Plant. Construction is set to begin in
mid-2005 and an agreement with Iran will be signed by the end of this year.
The minister said that the plant will have a capacity of 140 megawatts and
will produce 841 million kWh of electricity per year. For comparison he said
that 30 small hydro plants are operating in Armenia, producing a total of
600 million kWh of electricity per year. He said that the new plant would be
the best in Armenia as regards its technical and economic parameters and in
time it is planned to build a whole chain of plants on the Araks River
together with Iran.
The Armenian government and Energy Ministry are currently working on a
program to develop alternative energy production, to ensure Armenia’s
security in the event of Armenian Nuclear Power Plant closing. The main
emphasis in this program is being placed on developing hydro production.
CENN INFO
Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN)
Tel: ++995 32 92 39 46
Fax: ++995 32 92 39 47
E-mail: [email protected]
URL:

PRESS RELEASE
ARMENIAN AMERICAN VETERANS ORAL HISTORY PROJECT, INC.
489 MOUNT AUBURN STREET
WATERTOWN, MA 02472
Contact: Gregory H. Arabian
Tel (617)926-8600
Fax (617)926-8822
Email: [email protected]
Myron Khederian took a year to give up his story. Combat engineer,
rifleman and flame thrower in WWII, he claimed he `never did anything
worth mentioning.’
When his Armenian American AMVETS Post asked him to participate in
its Oral History, Myron’s family, reading the Newsletter, urged him to
tell his story without success. One day, just before a meeting, Oral
History Director and Judge Advocate Major Greg Arabian cajoled
Myron. He persuaded him to `just tell us a few things’ about his
military experience. Myron gave an Oral History that later proved
invaluable to his family who never knew about it. A year later, Myron
died. At church, fellow veteran Arthur `Libby’ Arakelian presented the
family with Myron’s Oral History taken a few months before. Myron’s
family was flabbergasted, surprised and thankful – all at the same
time. In a letter to Major Arabian, they described how they urged him
to participate, how he repeatedly and stubbornly refused, and now, how
indescribably valuable and precious it was for them to have this
permanent taped record of his amazing military history.
`It’s always the same,’ says Arabian. `Great veterans with great
stories who won’t talk about it unless and until you cajole, persist,
insist, and gently draw it out of them. It is a gentle art.’ In less
than two years, Arabian completed over 55 Oral Histories of a Post of
mostly Armenian American combat veterans, at no charge, at no cost to
the veteran. At the expense of his professional time, he travels from
his small law office to his Post, coordinating his time with days when
these elderly veterans can make it. Every veteran receives a copy of
his Oral History in less than a week. `We lose over 1000 veterans a
day, ` says Arabian. `That means that as every day that goes by, we
lose over 1000 Oral Histories that never made it. That is why I had to
do more.’
Supported by the Veterans History Project of the Library of Congress,
Arabian now conducts Oral Histories of all Armenian American veterans
of WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. He
has enlisted the support of a videographer, purchased camera and
recording equipment, practiced the latest techniques and refined Oral
History to an art far beyond his initial dreams. He looks everywhere
for new recruits, will go anywhere within reason to get them, and
takes great pleasure in his ever improving techniques. He simply likes
veterans. Those who know anyone of the dying breed of the Greatest
Generation and especially now, those veterans who have a story to tell
would do our country a great service by contacting him at The Armenian
American Veterans Oral History Project, 489 Mount Auburn Street,
Watertown, MA 02472 or contact him at [email protected]. You will be
pleasantly surprised.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 375033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 1) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 1) 52.48.46
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:
June 25, 2004
ACNIS Releases Opinion Polls on Karabagh:
Society Weighs In on Peace, Security, Status
Yerevan–The Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS)
today issued the results of both a public survey and a specialized
questionnaire on “Regulating the Karabagh Conflict,” which it conducted
between May 27 and June 18 in Yerevan and all of Armenia’s regions. The
announcement and accompanying analysis were made during a roundtable
discussion at ACNIS headquarters which assessed the present phase of the
Mountainous Karabagh peace process, compared and contrasted expert and
public perceptions of the issue, and summarized its possible outcomes.
ACNIS founder Raffi Hovannisian greeted the invited guests and public
participants with opening remarks. “These twin surveys, in which 50 policy
analysts and 1,950 citizens from across Armenia respectively took part,
provide a solid basis for recording, interpreting, and evaluating public
attitudes in the light of more specialized opinions. It is our hope that the
relevant republic-wide institutions will draw appropriate conclusions for
the charting of Armenian national policy,” Hovannisian said.
ACNIS legal and political affairs analyst Stepan Safarian presented “The
Aims, Methodology, and Results of the Survey,” focusing in detail on the
findings of the expert and public opinion polls. Accordingly, 60% of the
surveyed experts assert that the Karabagh question is the priority issue for
Armenia today, 32% are of the opposite opinion, while 8% find it difficult
to answer. In the public opinion poll, these indices read 64.9%, 22.1%, and
13%, respectively.
Since the raising of the Karabagh question (1988-2004), 82% of respondent
experts consider the greatest achievement to be independence and
sovereignty, 8% guarantees of physical security, 4% confidence in our own
abilities, and 4% enhancement of territory. As for the public survey, 49.7%
think that the most important accomplishment is independence, 6% guarantees
of physical security, 10% confidence in one’s own abilities, and 12.8%
enhancement of territory. 54% of responding specialists see the status of
Mountainous Karabagh as a part of Armenia, 32% as an independent and
sovereign republic, while 10% find it acceptable for Karabagh to be an
autonomous part of Azerbaijan. Among the broader public, these figures are
59.7%, 38.6%, and 1.1%, respectively.
What destiny awaits the liberated territories? In response to this question,
6% of experts suppose they will completely be united with Mountainous
Karabagh, 20% expect their union with Armenia alongside Karabagh, 40%
believe it fair to yield the liberated territories, except Lachin and
Kelbajar, to Azerbaijan as the result of compromise, 20% are for ceding the
liberated territories to Azerbaijan, save Lachin, under the same conditions,
and 8% think that they will completely be attached to Azerbaijan. The public
also is concerned about the future of the liberated territories. 30.3% of
responding citizens are for their union with Karabagh, 45.5% opine that they
should be united with Armenia alongside Karabagh, 11.2% are for dividing
these territories among the parties to the conflict, leaving Lachin and
Kelbajar to Armenia, and 1% conclude that they should be attached to
Azerbaijan.
In this connection, 50% of the polled experts think that the Armenian
parties might make territorial compromises only in the case of Azerbaijani
recognition of Karabagh’s independence or its union with Armenia, 4% in case
of Azerbaijan’s opening of roads leading to Armenia and Mountainous
Karabagh, and 20% upon signing a peace accord with Azerbaijan and ruling out
war with it, while 26% find that liberated lands cannot be subject to mutual
concessions and bargaining, even if that means the resumption of military
operations. The public opinion poll looks like this: 40.7% would agree to
compromises only in case of Azerbaijani recognition of Karabagh’s
independence, 6.4% in case of Azerbaijan’s opening of roads leading to
Armenia and Mountainous Karabagh, and 14.1% upon signing a peace accord with
Azerbaijan, while 32.4% will concede nothing even if that means the
resumption of war.
The majority of experts, 86%, are against the return of Azerbaijanis to
their places of former residence in Karabagh and the liberated territories,
and only 14% are for it. As for the circumstances under which they would
agree to such a return, if necessity dictates, 42% think it is possible only
after final regulation of the Karabagh issue, 18% simultaneous with
resolution if this can help promote the process, 26% are opposed in all
cases, while 8% believe it should turn on an equivalent step taken by
Azerbaijan and Turkey. The figures received from among the rank-and-file
citizens differ a bit here. 21.3% of polled citizens would agree to the
refugees’ return only after the final resolution of the Karabagh question,
14.7% think it should be conditional on an equivalent step taken by
Azerbaijan and Turkey, while 41.9% are unequivocally opposed.
40% of the experts are completely dissatisfied with the Karabagh negotiation
process, 32% are more dissatisfied than satisfied, 14% are more satisfied,
4% are completely satisfied, while 10% find it difficult to answer for lack
of information. In contrast with the private analysts, the members of the
public are in a more optimistic mood. Only 13.5% are completely dissatisfied
with the negotiation process, 37.9% are relatively dissatisfied, 22.6% are
relatively satisfied, and 3 % are completely satisfied, whereas 23% find it
difficult to answer for lack of information. To the extent the negotiation
process is deemed unsatisfactory, 18% hold accountable the former
administration, 42% the current administration, 8% mediating organizations,
8% the international community, 10% Armenian society, and 8% all Armenians.
In considerable measure, expert opinions and citizen attitudes do not
coincide on this question as well. 29.5% of the latter blame the former
administration, 34.6% the current administration, 1.7% Armenian society, and
3.6% all Armenians.
70% of the questioned specialists are dissatisfied with the activities of
the OSCE Minsk Group, whereas 54% of citizens are not even familiar with
them. 60% of experts believe that the position of none of the co-chair
countries in the OSCE Minsk Group corresponds with those of Armenia and
Karabagh, 18% think the United States position to be more in line with the
Armenian ones, 10% appreciate Russia’s position, and 10% mark France. As for
the public poll, the corresponding findings are 36% (none), 2.8% (USA),
28.8% (Russia), and 25.7% (France).
The overwhelming majority of experts, 90%, are convinced that the Karabagh
problem can be solved peacefully and without resort to renewed war, and only
8% think that the solution can be achieved by force of arms. In this regard
the citizens again are the more optimistic: 86% of them believe in a
peaceable resolution of the conflict, while 14% conclude that military might
is the only way. It is noteworthy that 67.7% of the public respondents are
ready to participate to their utmost in the defense of Mountainous Karabagh
in the event of a fresh outbreak of hostilities.
What do the figures reveal? Davit Petrosian, political analyst for Noyan
Tapan news agency, offered a critical intervention entitled “An Alternative
Comment on the Poll Results.” Petrosian maintained that one of the most
valuable accomplishments reflected by the surveys is that both responding
experts and citizens hold Armenia’s independence in high esteem, and this is
an encouraging affirmation. There also are, however, painful results. “We
may deduce from many of the answers that the public does not trust the
Karabagh problem to the current administration, and to be more exact only
2.5% trust it,” he said.
The formal presentations were followed by contributions by Supreme Council
Deputy Club chairman Ruben Torosian; Avetik Ishkhanian of the Armenian
Helsinki Committee; Yerevan State Linguistic University professor Hrach
Tatevian; Armen Aghayan of the “Protection of Liberated Territories” public
initiative; Artsrun Pepanian, political analyst for AR television; ACNIS
analyst Hovsep Khurshudian; Ruzan Khachatrian of the People’s Party of
Armenia; National Press Club chairperson Narine Mkrtchian; National State
Party chairman Samvel Shahinian; Tamara Vardanian of the Noravank
foundation; Karabagh analyst Alvard Barkhudarian; Slavonic University
professor Rosalia Gabrielian; and several others. Most speakers underscored
the importance of the information and supporting analyses uncovered by the
surveys in terms of facilitating a comprehensive and objective understanding
of the Karabagh challenge.
All 50 professionals who took part in the focus poll are from Yerevan. 90%
of them are male, and 10% female; 8% are 30 years of age or below, 40%
31-40, 42% 41-50, and 10% 50 or above. All of the experts surveyed have
received higher education: 20% are candidates of science (PhD), 76% hold a
Master’s degree, while 4% have earned solely a Bachelor’s degree. As for the
1,950 citizens polled, 50% of them are male and 50% female; 30.5% are 30
years of age or below, 45.2% 31-50, 20.6% 51-70, 3.7% 71 or above. 45.7% of
the responding citizens have received higher education, whereas 11.2%
incomplete higher, 17.3% specialized secondary, 21.6% secondary, and 2.4%
incomplete secondary training. Urban residents constitute 60.7% of the
citizens surveyed, and rural residents make up 39.3%. 34.3% are from
Yerevan, and 65.7% from all of Armenia’s regions.
Founded in 1994 by Armenia’s first Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi K.
Hovannisian and supported by a global network of contributors, ACNIS serves
as a link between innovative scholarship and the public policy challenges
facing Armenia and the Armenian people in the post-Soviet world. It also
aspires to be a catalyst for creative, strategic thinking and a wider
understanding of the new global environment. In 2004, the Center focuses
primarily on public outreach, civic education, and applied research on
critical domestic and foreign policy issues for the state and the nation.
For further information on the Center or the full graphics of the poll
results, call (3741) 52-87-80 or 27-48-18; fax (3741) 52-48-46; e-mail
[email protected] or [email protected]; or visit

Middle Israel: Talking Turkey
Jerusalem Post (Online Edition)
June 24, 2004
By Amotz Asa-El, [email protected]
“Our forefathers, at their strongest time in history, opened up their
hearts to the Jews who had been driven out of Spain at the time of the
Inquisition and opened up their hearts and homes to the Jews. Jews were
the victims at that time.
Today, the Palestinians are the victims, and unfortunately the people of
Israel are treating the Palestinians as they were treated 500 years ago.
Bombing people – civilians – from helicopters, killing people without
any considerations – children, women, the elderly – razing their
buildings using bulldozers.
When I explained all this to your minister of energy, his response was
‘only a friend can be this sincere and talk this openly.'”
Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
Haaretz, June 4, 2004
********************
Mr. Prime Minister
You may have expected world Jewry to regard your recent remarks
concerning the Jewish state’s conduct of its current war, and your
government’s recalling of its ambassador from Tel Aviv for
consultations, with awe; after all, yours is a major power, and its
place among the familiar choir of anti-Israeli pontiffs is not natural.
In fact, you have accomplished the opposite, raising doubts about
your own historical insights, personal integrity, and diplomatic
reliability.
Fortunately, your Islamic party has proven itself happily modernist,
a movement that once in power embraced the separation of church and
state, promoted market economics, courted Europe as feverishly as its
secularist predecessors, and inspired moderation in Cyprus.
And yet you have just launched a vicious attack at us, and it would
be useful for you to fathom its severity now rather than lament its
impression later.
FIRST, THERE is the moral aspect.
You appear to believe that you carry some moral weight with which you
can reprimand us while we fight a war that has been much more vicious
than anything your countrymen have faced in more than 80 years. Yet
the fact is that, with all due respect to your tentative release of a
handful of Kurdish dissidents recently, you remain hostile to their
general cause, arguing that they should never have a state. Not only
do you deny that nation the right of self-determination in your land,
you also deny it elsewhere. A Kurdish autonomy in Iraq, you recently
told Newsweek, would not be “healthy,” as it would “bother” Syria,
Iran, and Turkey.
Now truthfully, Mr. Prime Minister, how do you want the Jews to take
seriously your hectoring about their treatment of the Palestinians
when this is what you have to offer a nation that, unlike the
Palestinians, has existed for centuries, has its own language, and
numbers at least 30 million people? Forgive us for suspecting that
behind your high-minded talk about justice is actually a cynical
concern for power and disregard of other people’s rights, in line
with your country’s historic mistreatment of myriad nationalities,
from Greece in the west to Armenia in the east.
Forgive us also for reminding you that your criticism conveniently
ignores the fact that we Jews have offered the Palestinians a state,
half of our historic capital, and even a foothold in our religion’s
most sacred site.
Please understand that as long as you have not displayed even a
fraction of such pragmatism in your dealings with your own
adversaries, you are in no position to preach to us on these issues,
certainly not in a way that will make us reconsider our attitudes.
Yet a Jew’s qualm about your attack is not only about its morality,
but also its factuality.
Your portrayal of our military activity is almost childish. What are
you insinuating, that Israeli gunships routinely take to the air and
indiscriminately spray the humanity beneath them? Maybe you can get
away with spreading such Arabian Nights stories in the despotic
Middle East that you prefer to see conserved, and in the Europe you
are so eager to join. Here in Israel, sir, the citizenry is the army.
No one can tell us stories about what our army does and doesn’t do,
certainly not you. The army here is not some remote entity, or, as
you suggest, “the government”; the Israeli army is us, our families,
our neighbors, our friends and our colleagues. And the way we see it,
our army is surgically targeting the people who let our children’s
blood. And when innocents die for having been at the wrong place at
the wrong time, as always happens in wars – even ones fought by
Turkey – we regret it at least as much as you do. To blame us for
fighting a war we did not start is like blaming a surgeon for drawing
blood.
Yet even more perplexing is your abuse of our history.
First, one is at a loss to decide whether your statement that the
Jews are now doing what the Inquisition once did to them, is more
abusive or ignorant. Are you suggesting that we are putting hundreds
of thousands of people on boats and shipping them into the horizon,
or that we burn heretics in weekly auto-da-fes at Rabin Square? Give
us a break, Mr. Prime Minister. Europe has changed, and joining it no
longer requires blood-libeling the Jews.
There is something very touching, and sincere, about your nostalgia
for your ancestors’ hospitality toward ours, and your emulation of
that tolerance, as expressed by your visit to the Turkish chief rabbi
after the Istanbul synagogue bombings. Yet we Israelis have no
pretension of emulating the Jews of 15th-century Istanbul, whose
formula for Jewish survival boiled down to seeking non-Jewish
benevolence.
We, the sober survivors of centuries of abuse, prefer to survive
thanks to our own actions, and as such are determined to never again
be slaughtered with impunity. We prefer to be scolded abroad rather
than murdered at home, even if you protest that our murderer was “a
spiritual leader.”
And as for that minister of ours, who in response to your spitting in
his face and ours, could only bring himself to tell you that “only a
friend can be this sincere and talk this openly” – all I can say is
that only idiots like me could have voted for an idiot like him.
;cid=1088046780466