Nuclear Iran
The Atlantic recently asked a group of foreign-policy authorities about
Iran’s nuclear quest
The Atlantic Monthly
September 2006
The Agenda
Poll
Special extended Web version
Do you believe there is any set of incentives and economic sanctions
that could persuade Iran to give up its quest for nuclear weapons?
63%Yes
37%No
`Yes. Economic pressure can have a major impact on Tehran’s calculations,
given the demands of a young population. Such pressure would have to
include a ban on investment in the energy sector, and possibly an oil
embargo, to have the desired effect. And it would have to be coupled to a
clear economic and diplomatic rewards to provide the right incentives.’
`Yes, sort of – that is, I think they would be prepared to suspend [their
nuclear program], but hold on to enough capabilities to hedge against
unfavorable developments and restart it.’
`Yes. Iran is likely to insist on keeping a ‘research’ program that
preserves a small-scale, low-grade enrichment capability. But the right
package can forestall Tehran’s quest for nuclear weapons.’
`If the question is to persuade Iran to permanently abandon their quest,
the answer is no. If the question is to persuade Iran [not to seek]
nuclear weapons capability now (but with a capacity to move in that
direction in the future), I think the answer is yes.’
`A grand bargain with the United States might persuade Tehran to stop just
short of building the bomb. But neither [Iranian President Mahmoud]
Ahmadinejad nor the mullahs will sign any deal that requires Iran to shut
down its nuclear program. And any grand bargain will require Washington to
recognize Tehran as a major regional player.’
`Yes. There is a fifty percent chance that a grand bargain that includes
all carrots and sticks could persuade to postpone not give up – [their
nuclear program] for a period, say 5 years after which [it will be]
another issue.’
`Yes, but I think the important part of a package would be incentives,
including some form of security guarantees. I doubt that the threat of
economic sanctions is going to be all that much of a motivating force for
the Iranian leaders. The rest of the world is unlikely to be able to
boycott Iranian oil with much effect.’
`Give up? No. Postpone or delay? Yes. While a few countries, [having] once
embarked on the quest for nuclear weapons, have indeed decided to abandon
that quest when they concluded it was not in their interests. This
certainly includes Sweden, South Africa and Libya. Others have decided
that circumstances made it in their present interest to delay or postpone
an effort, but not to forsake forever such a quest. These countries,
Japan, Brazil and a few others, have kept the option available, usually
under the guise of a peaceful nuclear power program. Iran, at best, can be
moved to this second category of states.’
`Yes or no answers are difficult for these questions. My ‘Yes’ answer for
this question is very tentative. An absolutely solid set of highly
restrictive economic sanctions applied by all, or nearly all, nations
would over time force Iran to its knees. But it is highly unlikely that
such sanctions would ever be universally agreed or applied. The threat of
military action could work if it came from an alliance of nations
including the US, the UK, France, Germany, and Russia (or most of the
above). But the threat would have to be credible, and used if necessary.
Again, the ability to put such an alliance together is nil – at least at
this time.’
`No. However, a set of very strong incentives could lead Iran to slow the
program considerably to avoid further provocations. Tehran would still
seek nuclear weapons, but the problem would be put off for a while.’
`No, nothing to give up its quest but they may be willing to suspend
indefinitely or to maintain a highly inspected and monitored research
capability.’
`No, not with this regime.’
`No. I don’t believe the Europeans would make sanctions credible enough to
convince the Iranians that there’s really an ‘or else’ out there.’
`No. Iran has too much invested in its nuclear program. Even if, like
North Korea, it signed an accord, it would violate it.’
`Yes. (I note, however, that you have ‘loaded the question’ by assuming
that Iran is on a ‘quest for nuclear weapons’. There are other possible
explanations for what is going on, including prestige, regional influence,
a belief in the ‘right’ to be scientifically advanced, and getting our
goat – although you may indeed be right. Making that assumption at this
point necessarily pushes analysis in particular directions). The
incentives? In addition to the prospect of a lifting of all sanctions and
re-admission into the league of civilized nations, incentives should focus
on a U.S. offer of security guarantees for Iranian good behavior, the
latter defined in terms of a) no bomb; 2) open inspections; and 3) no more
support for Hezbollah or other terrorist groups. The fact that we will not
make such an offer (and ignored credible Iranian feelers on a ‘grand
bargain’ in 2003 – an event only marginally covered in the US press and
dismissed out of hand by the Administration) has dismayed the Europeans,
who have set as a key goal getting us to make this offer. Would it work?
Who can tell until we try; and if it does not, then we will be better able
to build genuine support among the Europeans for sanctions, etc. Indeed,
the fact that we will not put the security issue on the table only plays
into the hands of those in the Iranian leadership who would like to get
the bomb, if only for deterrence purposes. Economic sanctions? That would
just arm those in Teheran who would like Iran to thumb its nose at the
West and go hell-bent for a bomb.’
If Iran were to build nuclear weapons, do you think it would likely do any
of the following:
A. Support terrorism more aggressively, from behind a nuclear shield, with
the goal of further spreading the Islamic revolution?
58% Yes
42% No
`No. Iran’s decision to acquire nuclear weapons is driven principally by a
defensive need to deter attack and secondarily by the desire to be
recognized as a major regional power.’
`No. I think they will make that calculation whether or not they have
nuclear weapons.’
`No. They are already supporters of terrorism. Possession of nuclear
weapons is unlikely to give them an added ability to do so.’
`Doubtful, that is, ‘no.’ The Islamic Revolution is pretty much played
out, and you don’t spread revolution through the barrel of a (nuclear)
gun. It doesn’t work. And opponents can use counter techniques that stay
below the level at which an Iranian bomb could rationally be employed.’
`We need to find them an excuse to NOT pursue nuclear weapons [using]
diplomatic, security, economic, and energy incentives!’
`Yes. However, Iran’s goals would range from reducing U.S. influence to
engaging in a strategic rivalry with Saudi Arabia. Spreading the
revolution would be one goal of many, and not the most important one.’
B. Seek to drive up oil prices by bullying other OPEC members, closing the
Strait of Hormuz, or taking other actions for its economic gain?
65% No
35% Yes
`No. They are unlikely to be able to ‘bully’ enough other OPEC members to
have significant influence on oil prices.’
`No. I don’t think nuclear weapons will change their basic economic
behavior vis-à-vis oil production and transportation.’
`No. If Iran were to come to the conclusion that higher oil prices were in
its national interest we have given it far less risky options to
accomplish this. The failure of the US to put in place any national energy
policy other than convincing producers to hold US Treasuries and keep
pumping has left us with an oil market that will continue to teeter on the
brink of higher prices and lurch from one supply crisis to another. It can
do this now. If it has chosen not to do so, it is because it has learned
the lessons of Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, – sudden surges in oil prices can be
as destructive to the societies of producers as to the economies of
consumers. And the lessons of Gazprom that addiction gives you more real,
continuing power – and even a German Chancellor – whereas a naked display
of that power can be costly.’
`Doubtful. Iran has to live in the same world with the other oil
producers, it has an interest in a stable market place (at a high price
for oil, of course), and a bomb will not protect it from economic and
other countermeasures.’
`Yes. But only in response to coercive measures undertaken by the
international community.’
`Yes. Iran might bully OPEC members or be more aggressive in its foreign
policy. Closing the Strait [of Hormuz] would hurt Iran tremendously,
however, and it would not do this except in very dire circumstances.’
`Yes, of course. Simply posturing about nuclear weapons is a big economic
gain for Iran because it drives up oil prices.’
C. Use its nuclear weapons offensively, either by directly attacking other
countries or by passing the weapons to terrorist groups?
86% No 14% Yes
`I would say no to all three of these possibilities, unless we attack
them.’
`No, but I am not as certain as I would like to be.’
`No. Iran can be deterred from doing so by the certain knowledge of
devastating retaliation.’
`No. They will face very credible nuclear deterrence from the US and
Israel.’
`No. Iran has had chemical weapons for twenty years now and has not passed
them to terrorists – upping the stakes and passing a nuclear weapon would be
highly unlikely.’
`No. I think they will closely parallel the Chinese approach to nuclear
weapons – as the ultimate symbol of superpower status and political might,
but not as a war-fighting asset. I think we can deal with a nuclear Iran
through traditional methods of deterrence.’
`No. Nuclear weapons will make Iran more confident and perhaps more
influential, but not necessarily more irresponsible. Certainly that has
not been the effect of such capacity upon any other nuclear power. The
U.S. will be able to deter Iran from any use of its nuclear capacity
against the U.S. and its allies. Of course Iran will to a much lesser
degree also be able to deter the U.S.’
`The questions miss the point. Iran would attempt to exploit the
possession of nuclear weapons for purposes of prestige, rather than any
immediate concrete or exceptionally well-defined objectives.’
`No. Nobody even halfway rational and the Iranians are not irrationals
going to pass nuclear weapons to anyone else, much less a terrorist group
that might just attack the country that gave it the bomb. Offensive use of
the bomb would be ridiculous, even as a cover for a non-nuclear attack,
because Iran would be destroyed in the process. And who would let it get
to the point that it would have a true second-strike deterrent? Let’s face
it: for Iran, a bomb would be a political white elephant just as Qaddafi
concluded except perhaps to show it could build the bomb and to exert some
more influence in the region. But it would become even more of a pariah
state, it would be surrounded by Sen. John Warner’s ‘ring of deterrence,’
and it would find that it had got itself a bad deal. I do not want to live
in a world where Iran has the bomb, if only because of the uncertainties
that that would pose; but that is different from saying that a bomb would
free Iran from all constraints to behave within very severe limits in a
part of the world where reasonable behavior is a price for doing
business.’
`Yes. [Iran] is not building nuclear weapons as Christmas tree ornaments.’
`Yes – the real fear is [for Iran] to, at some point at least, give
nuclear know-how and equipment to terrorist allies. This might fall short
of “passing the weapons to terrorist groups” but falls long on the scale
of danger.’
`This is the real question! Most analysts will say that history shows that
possession of nuclear weapons makes states more risk adverse and
interested in stability. Classic case is the loss of revolutionary zeal in
China after it crossed the threshold. But the real question is whether
Iran is like all other states or does it believe that it has a divine
mission whose accomplishment may well require massive destruction – even its
own. The awful truth is that no one knows the answer to this question. We
do not know it, not because we have a broken intelligence service that is
incapable of penetrating Tehran’s inner sanctums – although that is probably
true. We do not know the answer to this question because it is a battle
that is on-going in Iran itself and the answer belongs to the unknown
future not to the hidden, secret present. This leads me to the conclusion
that YES it is possible that Iran might indeed might in one way or the
other directly, actually use its nuclear weapons that we must do
everything in our power and interests to delay, postpone and deny it the
acquisition of these weapons.’
`Once again, your choices do not exhaust the possibilities. Would it
increase Iranian influence and stature? Yes. Would it tend to make them
bolder and more assertive in foreign policy in ways that may not be
predictable? Yes. Will it have the effect of making other powers in the
region seek to shore up their own arsenals? Yes.’
`No to all three, but frankly, the questions as stated miss the point.
Whether it is likely to do so or not (more than a fifty percent chance) is
less important than whether there is a reasonable chance that it might
(zero to fifty percent) and the answer to each is yes. That makes it a
sufficiently serious threat. Moreover, it could act aggressively in other
ways not contemplated in the question that should concern us – e.g. meddling
in Iraq more, funding and supporting Palestinian extremists more
aggressively [from] behind a nuclear shield without broader intent to
foment Islamic Revolution, or transferring technology (but not actual
weapons) to others that are equally threatening to US interests.’
`The biggest negatives of Iran succeeding in realizing their nuclear
ambitions are: First, triggering a ‘cascade of proliferation’ as imagined
in the recent UN high level commission report, where countries like Egypt,
Saudi Arabia, and Syria would form a multi-party arms race in the Middle
East certain to increase instability in an already-unstable region and
would likely to lead to some use of nuclear weapons. Second, the risk that
in a semi-stable regime with multiple, competing power groups such as
Iran’s, one would believe that it could transfer warhead to terrorists
without fingerprints. Third, that Israel – the state for which this is the
most urgent existential threat – attacks Iran to prevent them from getting
the bomb, leading to retaliation against not only Israel, but the US which
will be blamed as well, even if Bush administration tries to distance the
US from Israel’s actions.’
`Yes or no answers are difficult for these questions. Iran might decide to
use any of the courses of action described above, depending on how the
leadership estimated the likely response. The action that most worries me
is ‘passing the weapons to terrorist groups’. That would provide the
Iranians with the best cover for its actions.’
PARTICIPANTS (38): Kenneth Adelman, Graham Allison, Ronald Asmus, Samuel
Berger, Max Boot, Stephen Bosworth, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Daniel Byman,
Richard Clarke, Eliot Cohen, Ivo Daalder, James Dobbins, Lawrence
Eagleburger, Douglas Feith, John Gaddis, Robert Gallucci, Leslie Gelb,
Marc Grossman, John Hamre, Gary Hart, Bruce Hoffman, Robert Hunter, Tony
Judt, Robert Kagan, David Kay, Andrew Krepinevich, Charles Kupchan, John
Lehman, James Lindsay, William Nash, Joseph Nye, Carlos Pascual, Thomas
Pickering, Kenneth Pollack, Joseph Ralston, Susan Rice, Wendy Sherman,
James Steinberg.
Not all participants answered every question.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Nearer the Heart. New book of poems take us back to Armenian-American
child-hood
The Armenian Mirror Spectator
by Helene Pilibosian
5 August 2006
This new book of poems by a very prolific writer, a child of Armenian
immigrants who came to America after the Genocide, takes us back to an
Armenian-American child-hood spent in Racine and in Fresno. These
poems are made of moments, impressions out of the past and some doubts
about identity.
The name of the first section, `These are a few of my favorite
things,’ is about the neighbor Ruby or the girlfriend, Barbara Smith,
Douglas Park, the pond, and his mother.
There are three absorbing poems about William Saroyan and two of his
relatives, for the author knew the family and considered the great
writer his mentor. That fame, being so prized, brings much attention
even after death and brings the readers snatches of fascination. Later
on in the book there is another poem called `Three’ about a visit to
Bill Saroyan’s home. The author’s look at the Armenian past as
history including the sight of some Turks doesn’t communicate a heavy
sense of tragedy.
In the section titled `Beginnings’ there is a charming poem about
bridges that take us `across our town and the interstices of the
heart.’ Indeed, the bridges across hearts are precious and sometimes
difficult-. There is a lovely reminiscence about asking at
Bachaklian’s for magart (the starter for yogurt) and by mistake asking
for sarma (stuffed grape leaves). And add more scenes about fishing, the
fish fry, the yellow bricks of the abandoned factory, trains, the city,
the town, and Sammy Bar ice cream and you can relive this life through
nostalgia.
A poem tided `Thompsondale’ begins, `We will never leave the
picnic at Thompsondale, our mothers very beautiful in their summer
dresses, our fathers with straw hats and colored suspenders.’ The
details turn the clock back and keep it there. There is also a nice poem
about e. e. cummings, the famous American poet which the author wrote
out of admiration for his very original work.
In `Places’ the author writes a poem about being in Yugoslavia,
asking `had the mysterious East always been in our blood and bone?’
This writing about a foreign location is unusual in Kherdian’s work,
but it is telling. Writing about places and his reaction to them seems
to be his forte, though the places are usually in the United States,
places he inhabited or grew up in.
The style of these poems is direct and narrative in telling the reader
about experiences that have shaped his mind as he was growing up and
thus his future. Readers will find his down-to-earth approach
accessible.
This is a book that will appeal to readers of any age and even those who
don’t usually read poetry.
_________________
Nearer the Heart by David Kherdian was published by Taderon Press
(London and Reading, 2006, 94 pages) in association with the Gomidas
Institute. It is distributed worldwide by Garod Books Ltd.
([email protected]).

“Art Without Borders”, But Within Reasonable Boundaries
By: Garen Mikaelian
“Novoye Vremya” – Russian language bi-weekly
Yerevan, August 5, 2006
On August 4, 2006, a unique and unprecedented exhibition called
“Art Without Borders” opened at the Armenian Center for Contemporary
Experimental Art (“NPAK” in Armenian acronym) in Yerevan. For the
first time works of artists from Armenia, Georgia, Iran and Turkey
(video-art, installation, graphic art, computer art, photography)
appeared together in one venue.
The idea of the exhibition belongs to Edward Balassanian, one of the
founders of NPAK and its C.E.O. It is very simple and clear: To show
through art the brutal reality of the region and to help promote
mutual understanding between various ethnic groups of the region.
History of the region is full of dramatic and tragic events.
Relations are complex, and often non-compromising and inflexible. At
the same time we live in the XXI century, when the situation
in the world is totally different, and demands different modes
of interaction. Mankind, willingly or not is going towards
globalization. All are striving towards bright and civilized future,
for which they need to learn mutual toleration. Artists, the most
democratic and liberal sectors of any society teach lessons of
toleration.
Balassanian has worked on the project for more than 3 years.
Particularly in present conditions it is not so easy to gather
together artists of the region. However, the project succeeded. Only
Azerbaijan’s artists are missing. Apparently during personal contacts
they agreed to partake in the project. However at the end they made it
known that in Baku it is not encouraged. Organizers regret this turn
of events and hope that next time the “quintet” will get together in
its entirety.
Contemporary art in many, if not all respects has lost its national
character and is manifested by international means and methods. This
is why advocates of traditional art are nervous and excessively
agitated. But things are what they are. For contemporary artist what
is important is expression of unique and fresh ideas, in the context
of national identity, awareness and frame of mind.
An outstanding example of this is Sonia Balassanian’s installation.
Many small models of houses are placed on the floor of a dark room
simulating an entire city. Alarming sound of engines of planes flying
over are heard. Suddenly sound of an explosion. Red flashes glow in
the dark. Then silence. Unexpectedly images of human faces appear on
the houses. No need for any interpretation. It is a very passionate
and direct public statement. Everything, the space, the sound,
the color and the video are brought together to a focal point. The
emotional impact is awesome. It could hardly be possible to accomplish
by traditional means. Where could we find a new Picasso for a new
“Guernica”, and why?
Iranian artist Khosrow Hassan Zadeh reflects upon brutal murder
of 12 prostitutes in the town of Mashad. The basis of the works is
documentary photos, which have been processed by computer and have
been collaged on the mat. Pain and anger literally burst out of the
huge panels. Aren’t prostitutes God’s creation too?
Nadia Tsulukidze and Sophia Tabatadze [Georgia] presented a performance
piece using plastic and visual art. Sophia had produces a unique
“reportage” of her travels through Armenia and Azerbaijan. Her emphasis
was on human relations. There was also another, very personal layer
consisted of reading personal letters, which were about problems of
Georgian society and their interpretation. We must also speak about
issues which are usually left unspoken, and people do not like to
talk about them in public.
David Kareyan presented a telling and somber view of mans collision
with his living environment. A long line of dusty and muddy,
worn out domestic items was displayed, barren and dark. Feeling of
abandonment. Such is the situation after disasters and wars. Such
was the situation after September 11. But there is also hope. Here
and there small trees have grown. Life is continuing.
Grigor Khachatrian with his characteristic ingenuity uses Leonardo da
Vinci’s “Last Supper” and photographically replaces Christ’s and His
apostles’ faces by his own. “One of You Will Betray Me”. Deciphering
Grigorian version of the Supper is difficult, but interesting.
Anyone’s game. He provides such an opportunity. I, you, he? Which
one will betray…?
Farhad and Shirin from Tehran in their panels mock Americanization
of daily routine, by satirically changing writings on daily consumer
goods such as dish-washing liquids and similar products.
Turkish painters Ahmet Ogut and Sener Ozmen have presented
“Coloring Book”, which is a children’s book, but the pictures are
social-political images extracted from journalistic photographs. They
ask the audience to color the pictures like children would. It will
be interesting to see the outcome.
Irina Abjandadze shows series of magnificent duplex photographs, of
abandoned industrial buildings of town of Chiatura called “Parallel
Biographies”. It id difficult to describe the secret meaning. What is
it? collapse of industry, of the country, or the individual? Which one?
Contemporary art is not as simple as it was thought to be a few years
ago. Today, totally denying it, pushing it back, or trying to ridicule
it is stupid at the least. It exists. Period. Whether it appeals to
one or not is another issue. But it exists and resonates the social
and political events taking place in the world, and it does it by
accessible means. It poses questions, but does not provide answers,
as is the case with the arts in general. It is important to understand
and keep this in mind.
Besides the fact that any nation’s world and its art are multi-faceted,
they are also multi-vectored. “Art Without Borders is a plastic
oratory. Resources of contemporary art are unending.
However, they address logic first and later deal with emotions. One
should not approach it by expressions of “It is beautiful” or “It
is not beautiful”. To do so will be accepting defeat. In fact “Art
Without Borders” is a kind of independent public diplomacy. “Art
Without Borders” is common folks’, not “Knights'” concern about the
destiny and the future of the region. The future, which does not
deny the past in any way. This is why it is necessary to meet at art
exhibitions. May be something will come to fruition.
After all there is not going to be new migration [relocation] of
people. We need to tolerate one another.
Translated from Russian by EK

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Armenian National Committee – Nevada Chapter
PO Box 30943
Las Vegas, NV 89173-1028
Phone: 702.496.4985
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PRESS RELEASE +++ PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release: Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Contact: Ara Shirinian
Tel: (702) 496-4985
ARMENIAN GENOCIDE MEMORIAL TO BE BUILT IN DOWNTOWN LAS VEGAS
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA – The Armenian Community of Las Vegas, Nevada is
pleased to announce the formation of the Armenian Genocide Memorial
Committee comprised of local Armenians dedicated to the erection of
an Armenian Genocide Memorial in Las Vegas.
After several meetings with Mayor Oscar Goodman and Councilwoman Lois
Tarkanian, wife of famous UNLV basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian,
the Committee is pleased to announce the commitment of the City of
Las Vegas to dedicate land located in Centennial Plaza in downtown Las
Vegas on the corner of Fourth & Lewis Streets, between the Clark County
Courthouse and the United States District Court House. Mayor Goodman
announced Las Vegas’ commitment and the location of the Memorial at
the annual April 24 commemoration, which was also attended by all
three Nevada Congressmen, Rep. Porter, Rep. Berkley and Rep. Gibbons,
as well as a representative from Senator John Ensign’s office.
The site selected for the new Armenian Genocide Memorial is a well
traversed area in a business and legal district near the famous
Fremont Street Experience, a very fitting location for a monument
of such importance. It will be seen by thousands of people a day,
which makes it very unique among Armenian Genocide memorials, which
are often located in remote parks or upon church property. It is
important for all Armenians across the United States to support
this important Monument, which will serve to educate Armenians and
non-Armenians alike of the horrors of the Armenian Genocide.
The budget for this historical Monument has been set at $150,000. The
Committee is also accepting designs for the new Memorial. Interested
applicants should contact Abe Kassamanian at (702) 260-0899 for further
information. Tax deductible donations are also being accepted. Please
make your checks made payable to:
“Las Vegas Genocide Memorial Fund”,
Bank West of Nevada 2890 N. Green
Valley Parkway, Henderson, NV 89014
The Las Vegas Armenian Genocide Memorial may be the most important and
most seen Armenian Genocide monument to be planned by the Armenian
community in the United States. We urge all Armenians to show their
support by donating to the erection of the Memorial.
###

Bill to aid Israel, Armenia passes U.S. House
r/press/2006/6-8-06.htm
June 8, 2006
WASHINGTON , D.C. – The U.S. House today debated and passed the
Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2007. The legislation includes
funding for international aid, programs, and projects to assist in the
development of U.S. priorities abroad. Congressman Joe Knollenberg
(R-MI-09), a senior member of the committee with jurisdiction over
the bill, commended its passage.
“This is an excellent bill that balances the many priorities of
the United States around the world. Our foreign assistance fosters
democratic and transparent governments, promotes human rights, and
helps millions of people in need. While less than one percent of our
entire annual budget, foreign assistance serves as a main pillar of
our foreign policy and is an integral part of our national security.
This bill provides important economic and security assistance to
Israel , including $40 million for refugee resettlement. It also
prohibits direct funding for the Hamas-infected Palestinian Authority,
but allows limited humanitarian assistance under strict guidelines
and checks to ensure absolutely no funding reaches Hamas.
I am also particularly pleased that the bill provides $62 million in
economic assistance to Armenia . This funding is especially important
since Turkey and Azerbaijan continue to obstruct transportation and
infrastructure routes into and out of Armenia with the intention of
forcing Armenia into economic isolation.
This is a responsible bill. It’s the result of significant oversight,
it’s fiscally sound, and it focuses funding on priorities that will
advance democracy and freedom around the globe.”
###

ARMENIAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH PARTICIPATES IN “RELIGIONS FOR PEACE” WORLD SUMMIT
ARMENPRESS
Aug 28 2006
ETCHMIADZIN, AUGUST 28, ARMENPRESS: Armenian Apostolic Church for
the first time participates in a three-day “Religions for Peace”
world summit which kicked off in Japanese town of Kyoto.
Catholicosate press service said that more than 500 religious leaders,
including the leader of the Australian and New Zealand Diocese of
Armenian Church Archbishop Aghan Paliozian, as well as public and
political figures are participating in the summit.
“Religions for Peace” organization consists of inter-religious councils
and groups which are aimed at promoting cooperation among all the
religious communities of the world as well as at the elimination of
all the existing conflicts.
The first summit of the organization was held 35 years ago in Japanese
town of Kyoto.

FORCED COLLECTION OF MONEY PROHIBITED
Panorama.am
13:57 28/08/06
It is a well-known fact that schoolchildren are often asked to
bring money to schools for different reasons, let’s say for buying
stamps. Kamo AREYAN, Yerevan deputy mayor, is well aware of the fact
and raised his anger against such incidents at schools, saying “it
is a forced collection of money.”
The deputy mayor also said that it is not forbidden by law to collect
money at school but he said it should be made on the principle of
voluntarism. “If we learn about such facts, the principal of the school
will be dismissed not only from the school but from the educational
system,” Kamo Areyan warned.

NGO CHARGES ARMWATERCANAL WITH CORRUPTION
Yerevan, August 26. ArmInfo. Representatives of the Civil Rights
Development NGO appeared today in the Azdak discussion club with
corruption charges against ArmWaterCanal.
The head of the NGO, French citizen, lawyer Artashes Barseghyan says
that he has lived in the village of Kaghtsrashen, Ararat region,
since 2003. He has invested $1 mln in the development of the region’s
agriculture. He has necessary equipment but he can’t work as there
is no water in Kaghtsrashen and nearby villages. “Agriculture can’t
develop without water,” says Barseghyan.
The water pipeline built in the village ten years ago is worn out.
The village has water only 3 hours a day. Because of lack of water
the villagers are forced to drink dirty water, which is dangerous to
their health. However, ArmwaterCanal has not so far responded to any
complaint, while Health Care Ministry experts have said that the water
is good. What ArmWaterCanal really cares for is to collect payments. “I
have paid a huge sum in the last three years – it was quite enough
for repairing the water pipeline and for providing the village with
water round-the-clock. This is nothing but corruption blessed by the
minister of territorial administration Hovik Abrahamyan.”
In his turn, the lawyer of the NGO Hovik Arsenyan said that he had
asked the court of Ararat region to oblige ArmWaterCanal to meet its
contractual obligations and to provide its consumers with high-quality
drinking water. Arsenyan will also send necessary materials to the
public prosecutor’s office.

ANDRZEJ KASPRZYK DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR RUMORS ABOUT HIS PERSON
Baku, August 26. ArmInfo-TURAN. “I work on the basis of OSCE’s mandate,
agreed on with the sides. I am not going to resign; I will resign
only if the sides decline my candidature. However, none of the sides
have made such statement,” Andrzej Kasprzyk, representative of the
OSCE Chairman-in-Office, told TURAN, while commenting on critical
publications against him in the Azerbaijani media.
Kasprzyk does not understand the scandal that surrounds him and
has no idea who could be behind it. Kasprzyk categorically refutes
reproaches in media that he was involved in carpet business. “As I
am a diplomat, I cannot appeal to the court for blackmail,” Kasprzyk
said, while expressing concern that press published information from
doubtful sources. Kasprzyk said that he was in Europe and planned to
arrive in Baku in early in September.
Official Baku does not agree with Kasprszyk’s report about the results
of monitoring of fires on the frontline of the Azerbaijani-Armenian
front, particularly the statement that it is impossible to reveal
the reason for fires and who is guilty for them.
After Kasprzyk released this statement to the press, representatives
of the Foreign Ministry, the president’s administration and mass
media controlled by them began to accuse Kasprzyk of being unwilling
to see the obvious, being pro-Armenian and other sins.

AUGUST 31 SEPTEMBER 13 DELEGATION OF THE IMF IS TO VISIT ARMENIA
Yerevan, August 26. ArmInfo. On August 31 – September 13 the delegation
of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) will visit Armenia. The
delegation will be lead by Hassan Al-Atrasha, head of the Armenian
quarter of Department for Middle East and Central Asia.
During the visit the process of realizing the economic growth and
poverty reduction programs will be discussed.
To be reminded, in the frameworks of the poverty reduction program
Armenia is to receive SDR 23 million ($32,8 million). The credit is
to granted for 10 year term with 0,5% annual interest rate.