EU presses Ankara over reforms

Gulf Times, Qatar
Oct 9 2005
EU presses Ankara over reforms
Published: Sunday, 9 October, 2005, 10:14 AM Doha Time

ISTANBUL: The European Commission underlined yesterday that progress
in Turkey’s just-started EU entry talks depends crucially on the
speed of reforms by Ankara, warning it faces a `difficult journey’.
Turkey, which has been knocking at the European club’s door for four
decades, finally started EU talks last Tuesday after marathon
haggling overcame Austrian demands that Ankara be offered something
less than full membership.
But the EU has stressed all along that there is no guarantee of
eventual EU membership, and the talks are expected in any case to
last for at least a decade.
`The pace of the negotiations will be … determined by the pace of
the reforms,’ said European Union (EU) enlargement commissioner Olli
Rehn, after a meeting with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. `It
will be a difficult journey.’
Rehn, who will lead the negotiations on behalf of the EU’s executive
arm, also called on Turkish leaders to help overcome prejudices among
both ordinary Turks and Europeans.
`We need to work for better communication between Europe and Turkey
and with our citizens so we can surmount unnecessary difficulties,’
he said. `We discussed how to combat prejudices in Turkey and EU.’
Critics in Europe argue that the vast mostly-Muslim country, which
straddles the border Europe and Asia, is simply too economically and
culturally different to join the rich European club, where
Christianity remains the dominant faith.
Erdogan echoed the EU’s official’s comments, warning of a `difficult
process’.
`Naturally we will face many difficulties along the road,’ he said,
while insisting that Ankara will ultimately succeed in negotiating
its EU entry.
Rehn had discussions with Turkish officials in the capital Ankara on
Thursday, and on Friday travelled to Kayseri in central Anatolia, the
hometown of Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul.
Yesterday Rehn also met best-selling Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk,
who faces a possible three-year jail sentence for his views, and
urged EU candidate Turkey to respect freedom of expression.
`Free speech and free expression are core values of the European
Union,’ Rehn’s spokesman Krisztina Nagy quoted him as saying after
meeting Pamuk at his home in Istanbul.
`You don’t have to agree with everything a writer or journalist says
but they all have a right to express themselves freely,’ Rehn was
quoted as saying.
Pamuk, best known for historical novels such as My Name is Red and
The White Castle, is being charged in connection with claims that
Armenians suffered genocide at Ottoman Turkish hands during World War
I. The first hearing in his trial has been set for December 16.
Underlining the sensitivity of the Armenian issue in Turkey, an
Istanbul court gave Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrank Dink a
six-month suspended sentence on Friday for `insulting Turkish
identity’ in an article he wrote. –

Venice Biennale: Be Careful What You Wish For

Art in America
September 2005 Issue
Venice Biennale: Be Careful What You Wish For.
By Marcia E. Vetrocq
Despite the unprecedented appointment of two women as visual-arts
directors, the 2005 Biennale is a cautious affair, marked by close
administrative oversight and curatorial temperance. More garden party
than free-for-all, the event just might leave some visitors nostalgic
for the undisciplined–and occasionally spectacular–displays of years
past.
After the satanic heat and Babylonian excess of the last Venice Biennale
preview, the survivors of 2003 sounded downright catechistic when
reciting their common hopes for this year’s edition: greater thematic
coherence, a more restrained roster of artists, shorter entry lines,
fewer on-your-feet screening marathons and–admittedly beyond
bureaucratic determination–less punishing temperatures in which to
tackle a citywide event that has become a test of time management and
physical endurance. Meteorological prayers were answered in full, but,
as if by the malign volition of a devil who corrupts each wish even as
he grants it, the desired clarity and numerical abstemiousness (91
artists in the international group shows compared to 380 in 2003) became
the attributes of an exhibition that is all but purged of risk and
surprise. Well-groomed, responsible and as eager to please as a new
suitor, the 2005 Venice Biennale serves up contemporary art (and some
less-than-contemporary art) that is market wise, celebrity conscious and
chary of offending. That the exhibition comes wrapped in a
self-satisfied mantle of better-late-than-never feminism is cause for
some dismay.
It’s necessary, of course, to distinguish between the presentations in
the national pavilions, which are determined by each participating
country, and the large international group shows, which are curated by
visual-arts directors appointed by the administrative board that
oversees the event. Yet throughout all the sections this year, there
prevails a reassuring air, attributable in part to the sheer familiarity
and even seniority of many of the participants. For example, four of the
national pavilions that claim a hefty share of the limelight are
showcasing high-profile artists age 60 or older, with Prance, Great
Britain, Spain and the U.S. presenting, respectively, works by Annette
Messager, Gilbert & George, Antoni Muntadas and Ed Ruscha that are
unlikely to arouse any controversy. An almost deferential atmosphere
permeates the two international shows as well, thanks to the relatively
high number of well-known (and some deceased) artists, and to the
inclusion of a fair number of works that have already garnered critical
attention.
For this outing, the visual-arts directorship saw its first joint
appointment, that of Maria de Corral and Rosa Martinez, whose
nationality (Spanish) and gender (female) are likewise unprecedented in
the organization’s history. Installed in and outside the mazelike
Italian pavilion in the Giardini, de Corral’s show of 42 artists, “The
Experience of Art,” is dedicated to mapping the terra firma of art
today. The presence of Marlene Dumas, Gabriel Orozco, Rachel Whiteread,
Cildo Meireles, Dan Graham and other landmark figures is reasonable if
not stirring, while the inclusion of Francis Bacon, Philip Guston, Agnes
Martin and Juan Munoz arguably carries the enterprise too far into
retrospection. Martinez’s “Always a Little Further,” a presentation of
works by 49 individuals and teams that is intended to be the more
forward-looking of the two shows, occupies the expansive spaces of the
Arsenale, the past home of “Aperto,” “Utopia Station” and other edgy or
youthful manifestations. Yet Martinez’s roster inexplicably includes
Samuel Beckett and Louise Bourgeois–inspirational, yes,
up-to-the-minute, no–along with Jimmie Durham, Olafur Eliasson, Mona
Hatoum and others who might have easily been at home in de Corral’s
overview of contemporary art’s establishment.
Both group exhibitions include good works, but the overwhelming
impression is of a project of confirmation spiced with a bit of novelty,
rather like the audience-survey-driven programming of summer repertory
theater. Some of the responsibility for this pervasive caution, perhaps
the lion’s share, rests with Davide Croff, the current president of the
Biennale’s board [see “Front Page,” Oct. ’04]. Croft took the
step–previously the prerogative of the visual-arts director–of
articulating the Biennale’s prudent theme, which he then entrusted to de
Corral and Martinez. Moreover, for the first time the board named the
directors of two successive biennali, with Robert Storr’s appointment
for 2007 preempting a second outing by de Corral and Martinez. The board
further determined that Storr would be enlightened by the collected
wisdom of veteran biennial and Documenta curators and other high-profile
art professionals, a group of whom have been invited to Venice for a
summit in December.
One recalls past editions directed by Achille Bonito Oliva, Jean Clair
and Harald Szeemann as expressions of strong and compelling, though
certainly not infallible, curatorial vision. Francesco Bonami’s 2003
extravaganza, engorged and unfocused, seems to have been the last straw,
the Heaven’s Gate of biennali. The potential consequences of the
administration’s clipping the director’s wings and casting a net of
circumspection over all operations were nearly ignored in last summer’s
stir over the superficially radical step of appointing de Corral and
Martinez. But in truth, the designation of a woman or women to direct
the Biennale was so belated, the curators’ resumes are so long and
distinguished, and the outcome, after all, is so mainstream, that this
appointment really has caused no more of a ripple than, say, last year’s
casting of Denzel Washington in the wan remake of The Manchurian
Candidate: the public, as they say, was ready for it.
Grrrrrrl Power and (A Few) Bad Boys
De Corral and Martinez open each section of the international show with
an assertive graphic display: a digitally printed vinyl mural (called a
“wall tattoo” in the catalogue) by Barbara Kruger on the facade of the
Italian pavilion, and enormous posters by the Guerrilla Girls in the
Arsenale. Thus we enter, lashed by the irony of one (“YOU MAKE HISTORY
WHEN YOU DO BUSINESS”; “ADMIT NOTHING. BLAME EVERYONE”) and prodded by
the sarcasm of the others (“Where are the women artists of Venice?
Underneath the men”). Two ceiling-hung pieces by younger women follow
the works of the veteran feminists. Above the entrance foyer of the
Italian pavilion is suspended Monica Bonvicini’s Blind Shot (2004), a
menacing-looking but ultimately pointless jack hammer that cycles on
like a thunderous automatic weapon every two minutes or so. In the
Arsenale is Joana Vasconcelos’s The Bride (2001), an enormous teardrop
of a chandelier that proves, upon inspection, to be made of tampons
(14,000 of them) on a steel armature.
Contributing to the Biennale’s current of feminist triumphalism–the
title of Pilar Albarracin’s flamenco video, I Will Dance On Your Grave,
may say it best–are the unprecedented numerical strength of women
artists in both shows (less remarked upon is the equally dramatic spike
in the representation of artists from Iberia and Latin America) and the
awarding of three of the Biennale’s four Golden Lions to women artists.
Kruger received the award for lifetime achievement, and Annette
Messager, the first woman to represent France in Venice, was cited for
the outstanding national pavilion. The Golden Lions reserved for the
international show were apportioned between the two sections. Germany’s
Thomas Schutte, in de Corral’s survey, was recognized for his supremely
accomplished ensemble of framed engraved heads and pedestal-borne
metamorphic figures, the latter acquiring supplemental gravitas from the
adjacent hanging of Francis Bacon’s tortured anatomies. Regina Jose
Galindo, a Guatemalan artist from Martinez’s roster, was declared the
best participant under 35 for her viscerally political performance
videos.
As a feminist declaration, however, much of this feels more wishful and
nostalgic than pungent and present. Posters by the Guerrilla Girls, a
20-year-old collective (“fighting discrimination with facts, humor and
fake fur since 1985”) tick off a series of distressing statistics (fewer
than 40 of the roughly 1,240 artworks on view in six major museums of
Venice are by women; only 9 percent of the artists in the 1995 Biennale
were women). But it all seems like so much crabby shop talk when, far
from the spotlight, in the little pavilion of the Republic of Armenia in
Palazzo Zenobio, Diana Hakobian’s three-channel video, Logic of Power
(2005), offers an altogether more sobering and consequential-seeming set
of numbers about deaths resulting from illegal abortions, the depressed
level of women’s wages and the denial of higher education to women in
much of the world. While the Guerrilla Girls have updated their
iconography to include bimbo-of-the-moment Pamela Anderson and the
terror-alert color code system remade into an index of the Bush
administration’s hostility to women, their construction of the gender
problem nevertheless feels dated, and the humor has grown slack.
Is there something in the nature of triumph delayed that makes a bit of
slackness inevitable? Is it possible to match the initial jolt delivered
by Kruger, or by her sister text-messager Jenny Holzer, represented in
the Italian pavilion by a dramatic, Flavinesque corner piece? The punch
line of Vasconcelos’s feminine hygiene fixture seems like a small
“gotcha!” when one thinks of the shocking absorbent armory arrayed by
Judy Chicago in her 1972 Menstruation Bathroom for Womanhouse in L.A.
The videos of Galindo–whom we see shaving her body hair and striding
nude through town, walking through basins of blood and in close-up
footage of her hymenoplasty–strike one as too serf-consciously beholden
to Marina Abramovic, Ana Mendieta and Orlan. Meanwhile, in Runa Islam’s
film Be The First To See What You See As You See It (2004), the
affectless young woman who tentatively coaxes pieces of period china
(tired emblems of women’s domestic entrapment and presumed fragility)
off their platforms to a crash landing is a mere Stepford vandal
compared to the delirious slugger Pipilotti Rist, who demolished the
windows of parked cars with a long-stemmed red flower in an
unforgettable video in the 1997 Biennale. Even Eija-Liisa Ahtila, the
author of tart, tough minidramas probing the psychological and sexual
pressures that bear down on women and families, is represented in the
Italian pavilion by a cloying work, The Hour of Prayer (2005), a
four-screen projection in which a blonde Nordic beauty, grieving over
the death of her fluffy dog Luca, escapes to dusty, crowded Benin, where
the church bell-triggered barking of the lean local mutts becomes a
healing canine ritual.
With the curators showcasing women artists, you can’t resist searching
for constructions of gender in the works of the men they selected. For
example, William Kentridge’s installation in the Italian pavilion’s
elevated gallery is an affecting visualization of two realms of
enchantment–the intimate space of the studio and the vast reaches of
the Milky Way–that pays tribute to the early days of film-making.
Still, the presence in these projections of an elusive nude model/muse
and Kentridge’s imagining of the galaxy as great coiling spermlike
streams invoke the hoary erotic tradition of Courbet, Rodin and Matisse.
More overtly testosterone-fueled is Willie Doherty’s Non-Specific Threat
(2004), a looped game of chicken in which the camera circles an utterly
impassive yet stereotypically tough-looking man. It’s not clear whether
man or camera is the more predatory, since the menacing voiceover–“I
have contaminated you”; “You create me”–could be speaking for either.
Robin Rhode (who may owe something to fellow South African Kentridge for
his halting, low-tech method and incorporation of hand-drawn elements)
is perhaps the most evolved male in de Corral’s show, with his
PBS-friendy videos of children at play. Bruce Nauman remains the baddest
boy on the block with Shit in Your Hat–Head on a Chair, which offers a
thoroughly gratifying lesson in mime abuse. (Did de Corral reach back to
that work from 1990 merely because it’s in the collection of the
Fundacion “la Caixa,” which she directed from 1981 to ’91?)
Some highly caffeinated guy art can be found over at the Arsenale, too,
with John Bock’s obsessive-expulsive installation (the site of a preview
performance on the durable topos of taming a feral child) incorporating
athletic equipment, projectors and battered teddy bears, and the videos
of Blue Noses, a Moscow-based group whose unapologetically sexist antics
with naked girls, baguette phalluses and a mechanical alligator are
displayed on 12 monitors arranged face-up in a circle of cardboard
boxes. For a sharp behavioral alternative, C-prints, videos and garments
on mannequins capture the gender-bending outrageousness of performance
artist and super-size model Leigh Bowery. During the Biennale, Bowery
can be seen as painted by Lucian Freud in a retrospective at the Museo
Correr.
Fundamentally more tame and far too satisfied with its own leering
naughtiness is Francesco Vezzoli’s Trailer for a Remake of Gore Vidal’s
Caligula (2005), which is playing to packed houses in the Italian
pavilion. A steamy come-on for a fictional remake of the legendary smut
chestnut of 1979, the video features Helen Mirren and Adriana Asti (who
appeared in the original) hamming it up with Courtney Love, Karen Black,
Milla Jovovich, Benicio Del Toro, Barbara Bouchet and Vidal himself.
Notwithstanding long-term support received from the Fondazione Prada
(which organized the concurrent collateral show of Vezzoli’s work on
view at the Fondazione Cini), the artist turned to Donatella Versace for
costumes that are the last word in imperial glare. During the preview
days, only Candice Breitz’s videos, Mother and Father (both 2005), came
close to Vezzoli’s in audience draw, and they, too, feature Hollywood
actors and actresses, though the stars are not co-conspirators but
rather the digital raw material of highly edited sequences that mock the
cliches of family life.
Some Politics, Some Installations, Lots of Video
Compared to biennali past, you have to look hard in the Arsenale to
avoid concluding that the world is in pretty good shape, AIDS has been
cured and stability has been achieved in the world’s trouble spots. The
Guantanamo Initiative of Christoph Buchel and Gianni Motti (the latter
also one of four artists representing Switzerland) requires a small
detour to a shipping container parked outside the building. Launched
last year, the documentation-rich project calls upon the Castro
government–which does not recognize U.S. rights to Guantanamo and has
not cashed checks paid on the lease since 1959–to seize the base, with
its controversial military-run prison, and convert it into a cultural
center. For Palabras/Words (2005), within the Arsenale, the Cuban-born
Diango Hernandez arranges a tangle of wires and fallen electrical poles,
a symbol of failed planning and broken promises, through which we view a
projection of vintage news images and a scroll of the names of former
Communist-bloc nations and their leaders. Fidel Castro is the last
intransigent survivor of the lot.
If the Buchel-Motti initiative is quixotic, Emily Jacir’s Ramallah/New
York (2004-05), which juxtaposes footage of the ordinary activities of
small businesses in both cities, is, sad to say, altogether too
reasonable in its plea for mutual understanding. Meanwhile, Gregor
Schneider’s desire to construct a black cloth-draped, metal cubic
structure that resembles the Ka’ba, the centerpiece of Islam’s holiest
shrine in Mecca, is inexcusably naive. Wounded by the Biennale’s refusal
to back his plan (the administration not surprisingly concluded that the
piece, to be sited in the city’s congested tourist heartland, the Piazza
San Marco, could be offensive to Muslims), Schneider is showing a video
in the Arsenale with an animation of his proposal and an explication of
his soft-headed conviction that East and West can find common ground in
their shared preoccupation with simple formal elements (think Tony
Smith’s Die). Schneider seems rather more sulky than idealistic in the
Biennale catalogue, where his six alotted pages have been printed in
solid black.
Kidlat Tahimik, from the Philippines, and Sergio Vega, a Buenos
Aires-born and Gainesville-based artist, offer their own insights into
cultural difference. A favorite of film buffs, Tahimik’s The Perfumed
Nightmare (1977) follows the disillusionment of a young Filippino taxi
driver who dreams of traveling to the American paradise–Florida–to
become an astronaut. Transferred to video, the work is screened in the
Arsenale above an ad hoc installation that incorporates burned “relics”
from the artist’s fire-ravaged studio and some dubious artifacts–like
the statue of a “wind goddess” who faces a headless Marilyn Monroe
statuette with her skirt lifted by the draft from a subway grating–that
gently mock the equivalences people discern across cultures.
Referencing a different paradise, Vega’s hot-hued ensemble comprises a
number of individual objects, environments and photo-and-text-based
pieces that debunk–though not without affection–the centuries-old myth
of Brazil as a tropical paradise. Despite some discordant notes struck
by shantytown views with irate chickens and dogs, the installation is
wholly seductive, with inviting chairs, spongy floor cushions and bossa
nova grooves from vintage LPs. The environment is surely more relaxing
than the other participatory works by Brazil’s Rivane Neuenschwander,
who invites visitors to type wordless love letters on “modified”
typewriters; by the Centre of Attention, a London-based collective that
allows you to recline on a mortuary bier after you’ve scored your own
funeral with music downloaded from the Internet; and by Mariko Mori, who
has dusted off her brain wave interface pod for those in need of a quick
kip–by appointment only.

De Montreal a Ankara, controverse autour recit du genocide armenien

La Presse
Monde, jeudi 6 octobre 2005, p. A25
De Montréal à Ankara, controverse autour d’un récit du génocide arménien
Poursuivi par la justice de son pays, l’éditeur turc risque deux ans de
prison
Gruda, Agnès
Dora Sakayan tend un mince cahier à couverture brune où une écriture
compacte relate, jour après jour, le dernier chapitre du génocide arménien:
la destruction systématique de la ville turque de Smyrne.
L’auteur de ce journal, son grand-père Garabed Hatcherian, recense les deux
semaines d’horreur qui, en septembre 1922, ont coûté la vie à une dizaine de
milliers d’habitants de cette ville. Parmi eux, 10 membres de sa propre
famille.
Pour Mme Sakayan, linguiste montréalaise qui a longtemps enseigné à
l’Université McGill, ce petit cahier est une ” relique “, racontant le
chapitre le plus douloureux de son histoire familiale.
Mais ce document qui est resté pendant des décennies le secret le mieux
gardé de sa famille se trouve aussi au coeur d’une controverse bien
contemporaine. Le témoignage vient en effet de paraître en traduction
turque, à Ankara. Accusé d’outrage à l’identité turque, aux forces armées
nationales et à la mémoire du fondateur du pays, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, son
éditeur, Ragip Zarakolu, risque jusqu’à deux ans de prison.
M. Zarakolu a comparu en cour le 21 septembre. ” Ces événements ont vraiment
eu lieu. Interdire les choses n’y changera rien “, s’est-il alors défendu.
” Le meilleur moyen de prévenir les guerres civiles est de promouvoir la
culture de la paix, et pour cela, il faut permettre que l’on tire les leçons
des guerres passées “, ajoutait-il.
Censure de fer
De quelle guerre parle-t-il? De celle que son pays a menée à sa minorité
arménienne et dont l’acte le plus sanglant, joué en 1915, a fait plus d’un
million de victimes. Le gouvernement turc refuse de reconnaître toute
responsabilité dans ce massacre.
M. Zarakolu fait partie de la poignée d’intellectuels turcs qui tentent de
percer une brèche dans cet écran négationniste. Mais le régime d’Ankara
maintient une censure de fer sur cette question.
Ragip Zarakolu a eu de nombreux accrochages avec la justice. Aujourd’hui, il
mène de front quatre batailles judiciaires, toutes pour des ouvrages
traitant de la manière dont la Turquie traite ses minorités.
D’autres intellectuels, de plus en plus nombreux, tentent depuis peu
d’ouvrir la boîte aux fantômes arméniens. Alors les poursuites se
multiplient. Au moment où Ankara commence à négocier son adhésion à l’Union
européenne, ces recours en série ressemblent à une fuite en avant.
” Le gouvernement nous harcèle, mais si elle veut adhérer à l’Europe, la
Turquie ne pourra faire autrement que de faire face à ce passé “, note M.
Zarakolu, joint hier par La Presse. Autrement, la démocratisation du pays
est impossible, croit-il.
L’éditeur a longtemps crié seul dans le désert. Aujourd’hui, ce n’est plus
le cas. Une première conférence d’experts sur la question arménienne a eu
lieu fin septembre, à Istanbul.
” La glace a commencé à fondre, reconnaît Dora Sakayan. Mais je me demande
comment le gouvernement turc fera pour expliquer à son peuple ce que la
Turquie a fait aux Arméniens. ”
Secret de famille
La famille de Dora Sakayan est éparpillée aux quatre coins du monde et ce
n’est qu’en 1992 que cette universitaire a appris, par une cousine exilée en
France, l’existence du précieux journal de son grand-père.
Elle l’a édité, ajouté des commentaires et des références historiques, et
traduit- ou fait traduire- dans neuf langues. La version française est parue
il y a cinq ans, sous le titre Smyrne, entre le feu, le glaive et l’eau: les
épreuves d’un médecin arménien (éditions l’Harmattan).
Dans son journal, le docteur Garabed Hatcherian raconte comment le chaos et
la panique se sont emparés de cette ville qui avait accueilli de nombreux
survivants de 1915. Mais, surtout, il fait le lien entre le fondateur de
l’État turc, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, et le saccage de Smyrne. Pour la justice
turque, c’est impardonnable.
” Garabed Hatcherian était un citoyen loyal de notre pays, plaide pourtant
Ragip Zarakolu dans sa défense. Nous lui devons des excuses. ”
Des excuses? Dora Sakayan n’en demande pas tant. ” Je serais heureuse si
seulement le gouvernement turc reconnaissait ce qui est arrivé. Tant qu’il
ne l’a pas fait, je vis avec ce fardeau. Ma fille et mes petits-enfants
aussi. ”
Mais Ragip Zarakolu, qui doit accueillir aujourd’hui même à Ankara une
délégation européenne qui enquête sur la liberté d’expression en Turquie,
est sûr que son pays devra forcément soulager les descendants arméniens de
ce poids qu’ils traînent depuis 90 ans.
_________________________________
Agnès Gruda
Journaliste
La Presse
514-285-6587
514-346-4284 (cell)

ElBaradei says Peace Prize a “shot in the arm”

ElBaradei says Peace Prize a “shot in the arm”
By Francois Murphy
VIENNA, Oct 7 (Reuters) – U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed
ElBaradei said on Friday winning the Nobel Peace Prize would give him
and his agency a much-needed “shot in the arm” as they tackle nuclear
crises in Iran and North Korea.
He told reporters at the United Nations complex in Vienna that he was
surprised by the award but saw it as recognition of his agency’s work
and an encouragement to continue its efforts.
“The award sends a very strong message: ‘Keep doing what you are doing
— be impartial, act with integrity’, and that is what we intend to
do,” ElBaradei said after applause from U.N. staff.
“The advantage of having this recognition today, it will strengthen my
resolve.”
The 63-year-old Egyptian lawyer and the International Atomic Energy
Agency won the 2005 prize for their battle to stop states and
terrorists from acquiring the atom bomb and ensure safe civilian use
of nuclear energy.
“The fact that there is overwhelming public support for our work
definitely will help to resolve some of the major outstanding issues
we are facing today, including North Korea, including Iran and nuclear
disarmament.
“It is a responsibility but it is also a shot in the arm.”
SURPRISE
ElBaradei told reporters he had been certain he would not win, despite
being favoured, because he had not received the traditional advance
telephone call from the Nobel Committee. He only learnt of his win
while watching the televised ceremony.
“This came as an absolute surprise to me,” he said.
“I was watching television with my wife at 11 o’clock fully aware that
we did not make it because I did not get the call.
“And then I heard in Norwegian the (IAEA) and my name still in
Norwegian is the same, and I was just on my feet with my wife, hugging
and kissing and full of joy and full of pride,” he said.
The Nobel Committee said before the announcement it had tightened
secrecy after Reuters published the names of the 2003 and 2004 winners
before the official announcements.
ElBaradei, the first Egyptian winner since President Anwar Sadat in
1978, has faced criticism from many quarters, most recently from the
United States and Iran, over his efforts to investigate Tehran’s
nuclear programme.
Last month North Korea announced at the end of six-party talks that it
would scrap its nuclear arsenal in exchange for aid and security
guarantees from the United States, South Korea, Japan, China and
Russia. ElBaradei has said he hopes his agency’s inspectors can
return to the Stalinist state soon.
10/07/05 13:18 ET

Anti-nuclear campaigners tipped for Nobel Prize

Anti-nuclear campaigners tipped for Nobel Prize
By Alister Doyle
OSLO, Oct 6 (Reuters) – The 2005 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday is likely
to honour work to contain nuclear weapons 60 years after the
U.S. bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
Norway’s NRK television said on Thursday.
The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog and its head, Mohamed ElBaradei,
U.S. senator Richard Lugar and former Senator Sam Nunn and a
ban-the-bomb group representing Japanese survivors of the 1945
U.S. bombings seemed the frontrunners, it said.
The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee will announce its choice at
0900 GMT on Friday in Oslo from a secret list of 199 candidates.
NRK’s veteran correspondent Geir Helljesen, who has often correctly
tipped the winner of the annual prize, said on the main evening news
that the committee was likely to find “the fight against nuclear
weapons both central and topical.”
Worries about the nuclear programmes of North Korea and Iran and fears
that weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of
terrorists were likely to guide the choice.
Last year, Helljesen pointed to Kenyan environmentalist Wangari
Maathai as a likely winner of the award, set up in the 1895 will of
Swedish philanthropist Alfred Nobel. The prize is worth 10 million
Swedish crowns ($1.29 million).
Helljesen mentioned the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) and ElBaradei, Lugar and Nunn for their work to dismantle
ageing nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union and Japan’s Nihon
Hidankyo, which represents atom bomb victims.
NO GELDOF, BONO
Helljesen dismissed speculation that Irish rock star Bob Geldof might
win the prize for campaigning against poverty in Africa, saying that
he was not even among nominees. He said that Irish rocker Bono had
been nominated but would not win.
An anti-nuclear prize in 2005 would seem to confirm a trend on major
anniversaries of Hiroshima.
In 1995, British ban-the-bomb scientist Joseph Rotblat won with his
Pugwash organisation. In 1985, the award went to a U.S.-Soviet group
of doctors, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear
War.
Centrebet, an Australian Web site which was first to accept bets for
the prize in 2003, rates the IAEA favourite at 3-1 with both Nihon
Hidankyo and the Nunn-Lugar team among the top four.
Helljesen merely noted that Centrebet had also suggested Finnish
President Martti Ahtisaari, the bookmaker’s second favourite for his
work to broker a peace deal between Indonesia and Aceh rebels.
The Norwegian Nobel Institute says that it has cracked down on leaks
and notes that Helljesen is sometimes wrong, like in 1995 when he
failed to predict Rotblat’s prize.
Some peace researchers say the IAEA has done too little to merit the
prize amid standoffs with Iran and North Korea. Others say a prize to
the IAEA could encourage limits on the spread of nuclear arms after
the end of the Cold War.
Helljesen mentioned Hidankyo but not its co-chair Senji Yamaguchi,
also tipped for the prize. Yamaguchi was 14 when the bomb fell on
Nagasaki.
“I saw many children die, and when I fled to the mountains that day I
saw bodies with … internal organs coming out and faces split in
half. I saw many such bodies,” Yamaguchi told Reuters in an interview
at a Nagasaki home for the elderly.
“That is why I want to somehow eliminate nuclear weapons — for me
that is everything,” he said.
(Additional reporting by Takanori Isshiki in Nagasaki)
10/06/05 18:33 ET

US Armenians Indignant At US Administration Turkish Leaning Policy

Pan Armenian
Armenian Americans Indignant At US Administration Turkish Leaning Policy
08.10.2005 10:43
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ October 5 the Armenian National Committee of America
(ANCA) officially responded to the US State Department Attempt to prevent
the passing of the Armenian Genocide Resolution by the Congress. September
15 the House Foreign Relations Commission approved of 2 genocide bills,
which were to be introduced before the plenary session. The State Department
then addressed the Congress a letter against passing the resolutions. In a
response letter to US State Secretary Condoleezza Rice ANCA Chairman
expressed indignation over the US Administration policy, which supports
Turkey’s efforts to deny the Armenian Genocide.

If People Are Not Hypnotized “Yes” is impossible

A1+
| 15:40:07 | 08-10-2005 | Politics |
IF PEOPLE ARE NOT HYPNOTIZED `YES’ IS IMPOSSIBLE
‘No’ to the constitutional amendments would mean `no’ to the authorities.
This is the opinion of the opposition. If the people adopt the amendments
would it mean `no’ to the opposition. `Certainly the parliamentary
opposition is convinced that the nation by no means will adopt the
Constitution proposed by Robert Kocharyan’, Justice faction member Grigir
Harutyunyan says. `I do not doubt that the people will reject the amendments
of course of mass hypnoses will not take place’, National Unity Secretary
Alexan Karapetyan says.
Grigor Harutyunyan does not rule out that the outcome of the referendum will
be undesirable for the opposition. However it would be progress of the
society had an opportunity to express opinion. However presently it is just
a dream’, Grigor Harutyunyan says.
Alexan Karapetyan position is a little different. The National Unity does
not impose its opinion to the voters. If the referendum fails the
authorities will have to adopt the proposals of the National Unity on the
dissolution of the parliament and conduction of extra parliamentary and
presidential election’, he says
In Grigor Harutyunyan’s opinion, even if the amendments are adopted via
fraud, it will bring no stability, since no single document will function at
the incumbent authorities.’
Diana Markosyan

61-st Rose Roth Seminar “Security in the South Caucasus”

Panorama.am
13:30 08/10/05
61-st Rose Roth Seminar ¡§Security in the South Caucasus¡¨
7 October 2005
Report by the Secretary of the National Security Council under the President
of the Republic of Armenia ¡V Minister of Defense Serzh SARGSYAN
Topic: Defense reforms in South Caucasus
Dear organizers, participants, guests
First of all I would like to greet the organizers and the participants of
the seminar and congratulate for arranging such an interesting and
overarching event. This is an excellent manifestation of productive
cooperation between National Assembly of Armenia and NATO Parliamentary
Assembly.
Modernity, regional significance and in general the global nature of the
chosen topic make us study it thoroughly and multilaterally to have an
ultimate understanding of many aspects of defense reforms in South Caucasus.
. Political Military situation in South Caucasus: Regional threats
South Caucasus has traditionally been a crossroad, where the interests and
contradictions of different security forces, military political force
centers, and different super powers have been focused. This fact has
definitely left its footprint on historic development course of the regional
states. In this sense South Caucasus is a specific region with its
geography, history, culture, demography and with other factors
characterizing its security environment. It is a crossroad of different
ethnic groups, religions, cultures, and civilizations, transportation routes
of international importance. Although South Caucasus occupies a relatively
small area in geographical sense, nations have different world perception
given their historical-cultural development, language and as a consequence
national psychological features. These nations have for centuries been
involved in wars of empires and instilling hatred and enmity between them
was one of the effective ways for empires to achieve their goals and
interests. As a result international distrust has been shaped in the region,
often aggravating into atmosphere of hostility.
The main part of existing international conflicts in the region have their
roots in soviet period, since the demarcation lines in the South Caucasus
were drawn neglecting ethnographic and demographic factors.
After the breakdown of the Soviet Union South Caucasus found itself in a
security environment facing internal and external regional threats. Internal
regional threats are predominantly due to the existence of international
conflicts and armed conflicts. Being at the crossroad of interests between
East and West, Europe and Asia, Russia and USA, today the South Caucasus
continues to bear the impact of contest among these interests. The mentioned
factors bring about additional stimulus for different international security
systems to amplify the leverages on regional states¡¦ defense and security
systems. This is the very reason that the areas providing security and the
developments taking place here are prioritized and possibly politicized in
the regional states. What refers to the security systems and military
structures of South Caucasian states, it is worthy to note that these were
established during armed conflicts in all three states. Armed Forces being
organized under such conditions did not set the goal of being led by
international standards, which is a complex and time consuming process. They
were seeking to apply traditional and non-traditional methods to settle
interethnic problems through military means. It is understandable that all
the resources ¡V economic potential, traditions, armaments, tactics and
goals bore the imprint of the Soviet Union. However, under these
circumstances Armenian defense complex managed to withstand Azerbajanian
forces prevailing in strength and armaments and to provide both the security
of the population of the Republic of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh.
Thus, under such military-political conditions numerous threats come to the
fore, which are related to any of the South Caucasus States and have
symmetrical and asymmetrical nature.
As symmetrical threats of regional security may be viewed regional unsettled
conflicts and perspectives of their settlement through military means,
blockade of regional economic-transportation routes, unsatisfactory course
of democratization, disproportional development of regional states,
differentiated approach of external regional powers and international
community to regional states.
As asymmetrical threats of regional security may be viewed international
terrorism and the attempt of performing international terrorist network
activities in the region, regional intolerance and atmosphere of distrust,
seeding of international enmity, disinformation.
Here it is also worthy to mention another important thing: symmetrical and
asymmetrical threats are interwoven and the existence of the one may cause
the derivation of the others. For example, atmosphere of intolerance and
distrust may be easily abused by international terrorist organizations to
breed a fertile ground to resume military operations in South Caucasus
conflict areas.
All these threats have common nature that no country in the region is able
to avoid. Their ultimate defusion is impossible by individual efforts,
without the assistance of international community and reforms in security
and defense structures. In my opinion, this is the very goal that the
defense reforms in the South Caucasus are to be targeted at.
. Factors impacting defense reforms in South Caucasus
When speaking about defense reforms in South Caucasus those major factors
generating from regional political-military situation, which predetermine
the direction of defense reforms here, should be taken into consideration.
The first and the major factor is related to the existing conflicts that
three South Caucasus states are involved in: Armenia and Azerbaijan ¡V
Nagorno Kharabakh conflict, Georgia ¡V Abkhazia and South Ossetia. ¡§No
peace, no war¡¨ status greatly impacted on further development of military
components as well as foreign policy of regional states and state
development direction. As a result of these unsettled conflicts military
factor plays a considerable role in state efforts of construction both in
Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. Moreover there are many forces in regional
countries and especially in Azerbaijan that are guided by the destructive
desire of settling conflicts through military means. These forces shape an
atmosphere of intolerance by their bellicose policy, which involuntarily
impacts on comprehensive defense reforms in Armenia and makes the
authorities of the Republic of Armenia evince cautiousness. However it is
noteworthy to mention, that by the support of international organizations,
if not final settlement, at least, if possible to put it this way,
¡§stable¡¨ and ¡§guaranteed¡¨ freezing of the conflicts opens opportunities
to conduct gradual defense reforms.
The second important factor impacting on defence reforms in South Caucasus
are international new threats. Realizing these threats and especially the
effective struggle against international terrorism drastically changes
traditional security perceptions. If we cast a glance on the activities of
international terrorist organizations and the frames of counter-terrorist
military operations, we will notice that South Caucasus occupies
geographically central place within these frames. South Caucasus is a
crossroad ¡V a transit zone for Chechen, Arab-Israel, Iraqi, Afghan
terrorist pockets. Here, under conditions of weak state structures,
imperfect mechanisms to combat terrorism and under conditions of
international conflicts, an opportunity to establish terrorist network and
activities is open.
One of the main factors impacting on defense reforms in South Caucasus is
the European integration policy adopted by regional states. This policy
gives wide opportunities to be involved in European security structures and
to take advantage of their experience and advice. In general, intensive
reforms conducted in international defense and security structures, in
individual states, adopting new approaches, development of new mechanisms
attest that development of common strategy, improvement of interoperability
mechanisms, rapid response and peacekeeping forces, mobile teams and etc.
come to overtake traditional defense structures. These factors expedite
international integration processes in defense area.
South Caucasus states have also entered into a resolute stage of European
integration. It leaves its positive influence on directing defense reforms
of regional states in synergy with the principles of overall European
security system restructuring. Particularly both Armenia, Georgia and
Azerbaijan are involved in international stabilization processes. It
contributes to establish rapid response and peacekeeping forces in these
states in line with international standards and fully interoperable with
international forces. Anyhow there is a specific feature: three South
Caucasus states conduct integration separately` refusing internal regional
integration. Notwithstanding Armenia makes suggestions to establish regional
security system through cooperation and integration. It is clear that the
absence of internal regional integration and cooperation makes it impossible
to fully provide the security despite individual reforms in security
structure of South Caucasus states. Thus the absence of internal regional
integration essentially impacts on the nature and direction of defense
reforms.
In general positive and negative factors impacting defense reforms in South
Caucasus are numerous and miscellaneous which account for the cautiousness
of South Caucasus states to implement defense reforms.
. Standpoints of regional states on defense reforms: differences and
generalities Regional and international threats and South Caucasus European
Integration direction requires equivalent reforms from regional states.
However the nature, objectives, intensity and direction of reforms are
different in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
Differences in standpoints of three South Caucasus states in implementing
defense reforms are due to different perception of providing security and
defusing threats: these differences are widely displayed in the perceptions
of Armenia and Azerbaijan. For example, on the issue of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict settlement we are guided by the principle of ¡§Partnership for
Peace¡¨, suggesting to reach mutual confidence and stability through
cooperation, which is the primary precondition for the conflict resolution.
Azerbaijan, to the contrary, connects the establishment of cooperation with
the settlement of the conflict and rebuffs any suggestion of cooperation
until conflict resolution.
Having in circulation the option of settling Nagorno Karabakh conflict
through military means, authority circles of Azerbaijan have the vision of
reforming Armed Forces and enhancing the capabilities truly by militarized
means. To this end military expenses are multiplied in Azerbaijan year by
year. Moreover, the recent statement of Aliev on doubling the military
budget in 2006 is a challenge of arms race. Armenia, to the contrary, offers
complete exclusion of military settlement of the conflict to reach success
in defense reforms. This will give an opportunity not to weave defense
reforms with the conflict resolution and embark upon more practical steps.
But not receiving desirable response, Armenia has to and is ready to
withstand rude force with force. Armenia and Azerbaijan hold contradictory
opinions of issues on establishing regional security system and regional
integration. Both the official circles of Armenia and the representatives of
International community have made suggestions from different platforms on
this issue, every time Azerbaijan¡¦s refusal to start any cooperation.
Moreover, by this stance Azerbaijani authorities incite other countries also
to refusal. Frankly speaking, such a standpoint casts doubt on the desire of
Azerbajanian authorities to conduct defense reforms in line with
international standards.
In this hostile atmosphere to have a numerous army becomes a priority for
Armenia. We certainly realize that keeping a numerous army is not in line
with our aspirations and priorities of European integration, democratization
and reforms. However, in contrast with other priorities, which predominantly
generate from our national natural interests, having a numerous Armed Forces
is a compelling priority, a reliable guarantee to provide security.
On different occasions I have noted that most effective way to provide
military security and strengthen Armed Forces capabilities is military
integration and reforms. This strategy is important to meet the military
needs of the Armed Forces and to provide their stable development.
To have a stable security system Armenia is actively getting involved in
different security systems. Today Armenia cooperates within NATO and CSTO
/Collective Security Treaty Organization/, which contributes to the
establishment of Armenian Armed Forces interoperability capabilities by
different international standards. Therefore, both Armenian-Russian military
alliance within bilateral and CSTO frameworks and enhancement of cooperation
with NATO organizations and USA are the guarantees providing Armenia¡¦s
security. Through Armenia-NATO cooperation Armenia implements defense
reforms within the frameworks of PARP and IPAP. Reform strategy within CSTO
is targeted at establishing a joint and effective system to defuse security
threats.
Despite differences in standpoints of South Caucasus countries on defense
reform issues, there is a circumstance inspiring hope for their successful
implementation: defense reforms in three countries proceed in the course of
international integration.
We also realize, that defense reforms constitute only a part of overall
process of advanced development of statehood i.e. establishing legal state
and civil society. In this process the establishment of all legislative,
defense, social, economic, democratic institutions and the area of
institutional reforms are interconnected and symbiotic, and cannot develop
separately. Defense reforms conducted in regional states should be viewed in
the context of developing the countries through reforms and democratization
as one integral process, one system. It is impossible to build reformed,
transparent and modern Armed Forces in economically and socially weak
countries lacking democratic traditions and principles. Therefore, not only
cooperation with NATO must be taken full advantage of but also with other
European structures Council of Europe, OSCE, EU, the assistance of advanced
European institutes in this sphere, ¡§European Neighborhood policy¡¨,
Consultations of Venice commission for Democracy through Law, etc. Armenia
is resolute in its decision to be guided by this principle.
. The nature of defense reforms in South Caucasus region
I have already noted that defense reforms in South Caucasus with their
positive and negative aspects proceed in the spirit of European integration.
Cooperation with Euro-Atlantic Alliance plays a considerable role in these
reforms, since it is NATO who urges supports and assists in reforms.
What refers to the nature of defence reforms, as a result of consistent
policy in recent two years they have become more institutionalized`
engulfing real and specific goals. Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan have
joined PARP and IPAP by presenting all those goals that cooperation with
NATO is to be targeted to implement them.
By joining IPAP, Armenian on the whole presumes the following major reforms
in defense field: – Development of National Security Strategy
Although National Security Strategy will be developed for a transitional
period it will allow three South Caucasus states to reconfirm defending
nature of their activities aimed at providing national security supporting
the establishment of atmosphere of mutual confidence by that. Particularly
in Armenia¡¦s case once again it will be proclaimed that our country is for
peaceful settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict and is determined to
implement policy of integration to European structures. By 2007 Republic of
Armenia plans to develop the National Security Strategy and table it for
broad public discussions.
– Development of Defense Concept
Armenia greets NATO initiative to support the development of Strategy
Documents in South Caucasus states. Defense Concept of the Republic of
Armenia, which will be in harmony with the defense provisions defined by the
National Security Strategy, will be widely spread among population and will
be approved in 2007. It will also be submitted to the discussion of the
National Assembly of Armenia, which will provide the basis for near-term and
long-term defense planning. Defense Concept of Armenia will describe the
role and mission of Armenian Armed Forces and will serve as a principle
document to direct reform efforts. It will provide a single united strategic
direction for the Armed Forces and for other Government officials
responsible for national defense. Broad circulation of Defense Doctrine
across the country will foster public discussions on defense issues and will
provide support to meet military needs identified in the document. Defense
Strategy will play an important role to guide the efforts of Armenian Armed
Forces reforms and modernization.
– Defense system and particularly defense planning and budgeting reform
Reforming this area will give an opportunity to use defense resources more
effectively supporting the balance between economic growth and defense
expenditures. It will greatly enhance the defense budget transparency, which
will also contribute to strengthen mutual confidence in a stable security
environment.
– Strategic Defense Review
This process will give an opportunity to develop and implement plans for
Armed Forces improvement and transformation in accordance with tasks defined
by strategic documents. The process, which is planned to conduct during
defense reforms, will also continue after the completion of reforms becoming
a tool for Armed Forces assessment and continuous modernization.
– Defense Legislation and Administration Review
Through this review it will be possible to identify the shortfalls in
defense legislation and make necessary amendments to the legislation in
parallel with defense reforms. The present legislation /¡¨Law on Defense¡¦,
¡§Law on Mobilization¡¨, ¡§Law on Liability for Military Service¡¨, ¡§Law on
Entering to Military Service¡¨ and other laws/ will need to be changed after
Constitution reforms and approvement of National Security Strategy.
Amendments have already been made in defense legislation of the Republic of
Armenia. Particularly amendments were made to the ¡§Law on liability for
military service¡¨ of RA in October 2000, on 3rd July 2002 ¡§Law on entering
to Military Service¡¨ was adopted, and ¡§Law on Alternative Military
Service¡¨ of RA was adopted on 17 December 2003 and amended on 29 January
2004.
– Increasing the system of democratic-public control of the Armed Forces
will in its turn contribute to the enhancement of Armed Forces transparency
and will provide more public support to the state defense policy. It is
necessary to use the existing mechanisms when conducting events to increase
democratic control in regional states by expanding and improving them year
by year, training appropriate specialists and conducting public awareness
policy.
– Input of civilian personnel in the Armed Forces of the Republic of
Armenia Implementation of the above mentioned reforms will automatically
necessitate the input of civilian personnel in the Armed Forces system. MOD
will require civilian experts well aware of defense policy principle
provisions and able to manage different spheres of national defense
structure. Civilian experts can greatly contribute to the development of
defense policy, legislative collaboration, legal advice, resource
management, public affairs and procurements. Increasing the number of
civilian experts handling issues of defense policy development and planning
will assist Armenia to achieve her National Security goals.
As a result of the above mentioned activities the opportunity of
interoperability with European and Euro-Atlantic structures, institutional
and conceptual compatibility will be expanded, without any harm at all to
its cooperation within CSTO.
Anyhow the true desire and the real understanding by the heads of regional
states and public awareness policy based on that understanding is of primary
significance to successfully conduct the reforms. This is the only possible
way to smooth out existing contest, sometimes-even hostility between
regional nations. Obviously it is impossible to reach stability and
prosperity in South Caucasus when the head of one state speaks about
European integration, compromising and peaceful settlement of conflicts,
regional cooperation, but at the highest political level of the neighboring
state bellicose statements are made, thus seeding own people with hostility
and intolerance against the neighboring nation.
I am confident that the continuation of impartial and balanced policy course
towards Armenia and Azerbaijan by NATO and European institutions, efforts
seeking to establish an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual confidence will
uphold South Caucasus states to achieve cooperation through reforms and to
peace and stability through cooperation.
Thank you.

Choice between christian and muslim ways

A1+
| 17:09:54 | 08-10-2005 | Politics |
CHOICE BETWEEN CHRISTIAN AND MUSLIM WAYS
November 27 a referendum on constitutional amendments will be held in
Armenia
This is an examination for the authorities, who took lessons of democracy
from Europe. This event will reveal the attitude of the national towards the
leadership. However this choice will be falsified. The coalition forces
certainly do not conditioned the outcome of the referendum by the trust to
the authorities. `If we receive a positive result, we will have a state
based on democratic grounds, with balanced power branches and good
international reputation. Negative outcome would mean denial of everything
we have achieved during these years and our country will have not future
despite of change of power’, ARFD leader Levon Lazarian said.
With the adoption of the constitutional amendments, Armenia will rapidly
develop, RPA leader Galust Sahakyan stated. `If the referendum fails Armenia
will not be able to secure a proper position within international
structures’, he noted adding that the outcome should be positive only. `We
could choose either Muslim or Christian path. We have chosen the Christian
one, that is the European criteria, since they concord with our national
values. Over this reason I hope for the positive outcome of the referendum’,
he said.
Positive outcome of the referendum will become a considerable progress,
Orinats Yerkir Party member Samvel Balasanyan considers. In his words, there
are plenty of important items essential for Armenia on the way of
integration to the European structures. `Though the operating constitution
is not exhausted, the amendments are very important. Samvel Balasanyan is
convinced that the authorities will not resort to forgery. `We will closely
watch the process and do everything to make the election fair and free. This
a very important draft and it will be the basis for further steps’, he
resumed.
Diana Markosyan

The Solution Will Be Favourable

A1+
| 21:17:05 | 07-10-2005 | Politics |
THE SOLUTION WILL BE FAVOURABLE
`As to Karabakh issue, we’ll take a decision that is advantegeous for our
people, that solves the problem raised in 1988′, – Serge Sargsyan told the
journalist during today’s briefing.
Mr. Sargsyan didn’t comment on the parliament resolution concerning the
return of deposits. «I’ve never spoken loudly on tat subject and now I
won’t. The Prime-minister knows my opinion of that question, he’ll announce
it if he finds it necessary», – Minister of Defence said.