Golden Apricot international film festival

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

One of the most significant cultural events of the year, the second
international film festival Golden Apricot, is currently underway
in Yerevan. It is impossible to watch all the films presented at the
festival, to attend all festival events and press conferences. However,
we will try to present the most important and interesting events of
the festival to our readers.

Today our guest is Susan Khardalian, a film director from Sweden. She
is presenting a film on the Armenian Genocide titled “I Hate
Dogs”. Khardalian was born in Beirut. She studied at the local school
there and later graduated from an American university. She has worked
as a film director since 1988 and has directed 30 films.

S.K.: My background is in journalism. I have worked for some newspapers
in Lebanon, I have worked for a radio station. And journalism
brought me to the world of cinema and documentary films. Why? Because
journalism was very important for me in getting to know the world. But
the organizations where I worked limited me. And in this way I entered
cinematography. I have directed 30 films and all of them have social
implications, political aspects and social concerns connected with
conflicts.

Q: Do you mean ethnic conflicts and wars?
A: Different aspects of wars, the social problems connected with wars,
post-war problems, the situation and suffering of women in wars. And
especially, the problems of small nations. We have made several films
about the Palestinians, the Kurds, of course about the Armenians, about
issues of racism in Europe. These films all go beyond journalism; they
not only present information but contain subjective interpretations
of the author. What is important for us is not the details of a
phenomenon or an event. What we are interested in is the roots, the
social causes and if possible alternative solutions for such phenomena.

Q: You came to Yerevan to present your film titled “I Hate Dogs” at the
Golden Apricot Festival. Tell us about this film.
A: This is a short film. We came up with the idea of the film and made
it in the last six months. It is about an Armenian man who survived the
Genocide. Even though the Genocide is the man topic of the film, the
most important thing in it is the ability of Armenians to survive. And
it is also a love story. The man is 99 years old but he got married
at the age of 95. This enthusiasm for life is both very natural and
extraordinary for a person who has survived the Genocide. The film
lasts 28 minutes.

Q: So your hero is a real person? Are your films documentary?
A: This person has been in charge of the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation Party in France. He is a real person with a vivid mind and
great interest towards life and the world, Armenia and the Armenian
nation. He is well aware of the developments in Karabagh, the relations
between Armenia and Turkey, the process of Genocide recognition. He
reads newspapers and watches TV. He has already made up a list of
people whom he wants to invite to his 100th birthday anniversary.

Q: Please tell us about you team with whom you make your films. You
live in Sweden, does this mean that the films you make are presented
at various festivals by this country?
A: Our team is a small and independent one. 5 people work on each of
our projects. There are two directors, me and Pio Holmkwist, we are
co-authors. We have our team and our editor. It is an international
team that includes people from different countries and of different
nationalities. Our center is in Stockholm. We get our financing from
Swedish organizations.

Q: Do they order films from you?
A: No, we sell our projects.

Q: Does this mean that you get the funding before you make the film?
A: Yes, and this is what gives us independence. We sell our ideas and
our projects. People often ask me whether it was the Swedish government
that ordered the film “Return to Ararat”. I answer that it was not. The
Swedish government does not have a right to express their position on
the Genocide. After the film was launched the Turkish diplomats tried
to exert pressure on the Swedish authorities but the latter answered
that just as they do not have a right to order a film, they do not
have the right to ban it or to intervene in any other ways because we
are an independent organization. It’s interesting that the last film,
“I hate the dogs”, raised more resistance in Azerbaijan than in Turkey.

Q: What will be the topic of your next film?
A: It will be on the problems of globalization. The film will be titled
“Bullshit” and the title expresses our attitude towards the cataclysms
accompanying globalization.

Q: Let’s get back to the Golden Apricot. You did not participate in
the first festival, did you?
A: No, I didn’t participate in it.

Q: What is your impression of the festival?
A: Of course, it is a very important event first of all because it
opens up the Armenian issues and the Armenian reality for the world
and secondly, because it opens Armenia in the face of the developments
of the world cinema. The festival will no doubt have its influence
on the development of the Armenian cinema, and not only cinema.

SEE YOU IN SEPTEMBER

A1+
18-07-2005

Dear readers.

Today the internet site “A1+” goes on vacation. But the newspaper
“Ayb-Fe” continues its activity, and the materials of the newspaper
will be placed in the site.

Polls on different themes will also continue on our site, and as
always, we expect you to actively participate in them. In case of
need the the internet site “A1+” will refer to the important events
in the Republic online.

Dear readers, if you have advice, remarks and offers, we will be glad
to hear them if you write to our e-mail address [email protected]. After
the summer vacations we will return and continue to keep you aware
of the latest events in the Republic.

Leaders in waiting out to conjure a new vision of Europe

The Times/UK
July 18, 2005

By Charles Bremner and Roger Boyes
Stars of a new Paris – Berlin axis against the old guard meet with a new authority

THE outline of a new European landscape, both welcome and a challenge
to Britain, will be sketched in a Paris townhouse tomorrow when Angela
Merkel, Germany’s probable next Chancellor, meets Nicolas Sarkozy,
France’s would-be next President.

Frau Merkel, the Christian Democrat leader, holds a comfortable
lead on the Social Democrat Gerhard Schröder before the election
in September. M Sarkozy, the chief of President Chirac’s Union for
a Popular Majority and the most dynamic figure in French politics,
is hoping to replace M Chirac in 2007. The meeting is their first
since Frau Merkel won her party leadership.

She is a stolid east German and he is a slick Paris lawyer-politician,
and they are not close personally. But the ambitious 50-year-old
conservatives share so much common ground as pro-Atlantic,
market-minded reformers that their possible rise to office in tandem
conjures visions of a remarkable shift in continental power.

Under a Chancellor Merkel and a President Sarkozy, today’s weak and
defensive Paris-Berlin axis could give way to an easier alliance
with Britain.

Although she avoids the obvious comparison, last week Frau Merkel
praised the “very positive role” that Margaret Thatcher had played
in overhauling the British economy, which has now overtaken Germany’s
in per capita income.

M Sarkozy infuriated M Chirac last week by saying that France, also
trailing Britain, needed a Thatcher and a Blair to kick life into
its economy and scrap “the policies of 50 years ago”.

Both say that their nations need to move away from their old view
of themselves as the EU’s managing partners and repair links with
Washington. The French press refers to “Sarkozy l’Américain”.

Yet a healthy new ParisBerlin alliance, while broadly aligned with
Tony Blair’s view of the world, may not be such a welcome prospect
for the Prime Minister. A Merkel-Sarkozy agenda, potentially more
self-confident than any since the days of President Mitterrand and
Chancellor Kohl in the 1980s and 1990s, would create a different type
of axis, but it would remain opposed to some important British goals.

These include further EU enlargement. Both Frau Merkel and M
Sarkozy want Turkey to be excluded from Europe permanently —
a position popular in both countries but not supported by their
present goverments.

The pair, although more open to globalisation than their defensive
elders, would continue to pursue deeper European integration despite
difficulties over the constitution. Pragmatic and market-friendly,
they nevertheless remain sympathetic to industrial policies in which
the State promotes national “champions”. Frau Merkel is M Chirac’s
guest this week and her aides are reluctant to feed speculation of
a rift. “The thinking in the Merkel camp is plainly that Chirac has
passed his sell-by date,” one diplomat said. “But she would be really
ill-advised to let that seep into the public domain. She will have
to work with or around him on some key European projects from the
day after she wins.”

–Boundary_(ID_Z/xhgfYWE+xeyuHuBar+qg)–

PRESS RELEASE
July 18, 2005
Embassy of the Republic of Armenia
2225 R Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20008
Tel: 202-319-1976, x. 348; Fax: 202-319-2982
Email: [email protected]; Web:

Armepress News Agency Interview with Ambassador Tatoul Markarian on
U.S.-Armenian relations

Q. How would you describe the current status of U.S.-Armenian relations?

A. Armenia enjoys excellent relations with the United States, which are
deeply rooted in our shared values and principles. Our task is to further
enhance the already high level of cooperation and partnership with the
United States to the mutual benefit of our nations and in order to meet the
challenges that the international community now faces.

Since the restoration of its independence in 1991, Armenia has had many
achievements in building democratic institutions and civil society, a
representative form of government, and a free-market economy. We appreciate
greatly the enormous political, moral, and humanitarian support that the
United States has extended under the Freedom Support Act, and which helped
Armenia to sustain an independent statehood and implement democratic, legal,
and economic reforms.

The many institutionalized meetings and consultations between the
Governments of our countries, such as U.S.-Armenia Economic Task Force,
U.S.-Armenia Strategic Dialog, Bilateral Defense Consultations, provide a
framework for dialog on bilateral political, security, and economic
cooperation. Bilateral visits play an important role, and this year we have
already had a visit by the Foreign Minister, and the Prime Minister, the
Chairman of the Armenian National Assembly, and the Defense Minister will
visit later this year. U.S.-Armenia Task Force and U.S.-Armenia strategic
dialog meetings will be conducted in Washington later this year.

Q. What’s the level of economic cooperation between the two countries?

A. Since 1992, the level and scope of U.S. assistance programs have changed
from providing humanitarian assistance to mostly focusing on economic
development and democratic and legal reforms, reflecting the significant
progress made by Armenia in these areas.

Armenia’s economy is now more efficient, diversified, than those of its
neighbors. According to Wall Street Journal and the Heritage Foundation,
Armenia ranks higher in index of economic freedom than any other country in
Eurasia and most of Eastern Europe.

Armenia’s inclusion as a potential recipient of the Millennium Challenge
Account funds is a testimony to Armenia’s ability to rule justly, promote
economic freedom, and invest in people. The MCA funds and continued U.S.
assistance to Armenia will advance the objectives of poverty reduction and
promotion of economic growth, thus helping to unleash the creative potential
of the Armenian people. The appropriate Congressional subcommittees have
already voted to markup assistance to Armenia at the same level in 2006 as
it was this year. Equally important was maintaining parity in Congressional
allocation of military assistance to Armenia and Azerbaijan. Also, U.S. will
continue to provide humanitarian assistance to Nagorno Karabakh.

The United States is among Armenia’s top five trading partners, and over the
last 5 years, the exports of Armenian products to the United States have
grown significantly. Earlier in 2005, Armenia was granted the Permanent
Normal Trade Relations regime by the United States. At the same time, the
level of U.S. investments in Armenia is not high compared with the existing
potential. Therefore, promotion of trade and investment will be an important
priority.

Most U.S. investment to Armenia went into Armenia’s hospitality and IT
industries, particularly software manufacturing. Most of Armenia’s software
companies are geared towards the U.S. markets. Many hotels in Armenia are
now operated by Armenian-American investors, and this has helped raise the
standards and promote competition in this important industry. There are also
numerous small- and medium-scale Armenian-American entrepreneurs who own
businesses in Armenia, or engage in export and import operations.

Nevertheless, the prevailing model for U.S. investment in Armenia has been
foreign direct investments, or personal involvement of the entrepreneur or
manager. During my meetings many express willingness to take advantage of
the economic opportunities in Armenia, but the main limitation is that
potential investors are unable, due to lack of time or career
considerations, to move to Armenia to personally run their businesses.
Therefore, in order to attract more American investment to Armenia, there is
a need for new mechanisms, vehicles such as venture capital funds,
investment companies, etc.

Q. What’s the role of the Armenian-American community in our bilateral
relations?

A. The Armenian-American community is at the forefront of our relations,
promoting bilateral trade and scientific cooperation, as well as cultural
and interchurch contacts.

There are many distinguished Armenian-American individuals and organizations
that have provided important support to Armenia and Artsakh and continue
contributing immensely to strengthening the Armenian statehood, as well as
the development of the Armenian economy. Earlier this month, famous Armenian
benefactor Kirk Kirkorian’s Lincy Foundation announced the new 60 million
dollar program in Armenia.

Strengthening the Homeland-Diaspora ties remains a priority for the Armenian
government, and many institutional and ad hoc measures have been implemented
in recent years. I am convinced that we are only beginning to reveal the
synergies and realize this potential, and it is necessary to continue the
policies of bringing the Homeland and Diaspora even closer. Already today,
Armenia is home to all Armenians, and every Armenian can make a difference
there.

Q. How do you see the U.S. role in normalization of Armenian-Turkish
relations?

A. We appreciate the efforts by the United States government to promote
regional cooperation in South Caucasus, as it will increase the prosperity
and development in the entire region. The United States remains engaged with
our neighbor Turkey by continuously urging that country to contribute
positively to the development of South Caucasus by lifting the blockade on
and normalizing its relations with Armenia.

Nevertheless, the continued denial by Turkey of not only the past but also
the current realities, and, first of all, its refusal to establish normal
relations with and its blockade of Armenia leaves with no choice but to
pursue the resolution of all bilateral problems within the international
framework. In this context, in addition to European countries, the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United States will make the
message even stronger and more unanimous that Turkey has to face its
history. It has the potential to contribute to stimulating the Turkish
society to discuss this issue in a vigorous and democratic manner.

Q. Following the events in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan, what is the
U.S. position on domestic political developments and elections in Armenia?

A. The United States has been a partner in the process of implementation of
democratic and economic reforms in Armenia that are now firmly entrenched
and irrevocable. Our U.S. counterparts are interested that democratic
reforms in Armenia continue and be accomplished through political dialog.

As for elections, they present an important value, and in democratic
transition they are not only the means but often the ends. Meanwhile,
democracy cannot be advanced by conduct of elections alone. Elections, after
all, are a reflection of existing state of affairs in socio-economic and
political structures of the society. In this context, essential preparatory
work is carried out in Armenia for a sustained period of time to reform the
political and economic system. At this stage this means addressing key
issues, such as Constitutional reform, amending the Electoral Code, better
self-government for Armenia’s local communities, etc.

The recently developing agreement on these issues between the ruling
coalition and opposition in the parliament, in cooperation with the Council
of Europe, can serve as an example of how political issues can be resolved
by democratic means, such as dialog and parliamentary process. And this is
the way that is most preferred and appreciated by our U.S. counterparts.

Q. How does U.S.-Armenian security cooperation develop in the context of the
Global War on Terror?

A. Immediately in the wake of 9/11, Armenia has joined the international
anti-terror coalition and offered the use of its airspace and other tangible
assistance for the U.S.-led anti-terror operations. This also marked the
beginning of military cooperation between the U.S. and Armenia. It was made
possible by the waiver of Section 907, while also addressing the concerns of
Armenia regarding security in the region. The provision of U.S. military
assistance to Armenia helped the Armenian Armed Forces to establish
peacekeeping capability and address interoperability issues. The Armenian
soldiers and officers now serve alongside with their partners within NATO’s
Partnership for Peace program, and in Kosovo, and Armenia’s contingent is
serving in Iraq with many other nations of the coalition. Also important for
our military cooperation is the State Partnership Program between the Kansas
National Guard and the Armenian Armed Forces.

The first phase of our security cooperation is nearing completion, and we
know better the mutual potential and expectations. Armenia’s Defense
Minister will visit the United States later this year to discuss the current
level and future prospects for our cooperation.

Q. The U.S. officials have recently made a number of public statements on
the future status of Kosovo. How will the Kosovo status talks affect the NK
peace settlement?

A. The future of Kosovo has indeed been a subject of very open and public
discussions lately, with important statements by U.S. government officials.
No matter to what extent the Administration favors the principle of full
sovereignty of Kosovo, they find that the final status must be a result of
negotiation process. We understand the international community is not ready
to shoulder entire responsibility and suggest a universal solution to all
those cases or to impose ready-made solutions to Kosovo or other cases.

However, the international community could have been more vigorous in
supporting democracy and economic developments in these regions. The
argument that economic isolation will make conflicting parties more
malleable or eager to compromise is a wrong stereotype. On the contrary,
imposed isolation and economic scarcity can contribute to ethnocentrism and
make a conflicting party less inclined to compromise. It is encouraging that
the United States and European Union have already worked to promote
democratic values and economic freedom in Kosovo, which will inevitably
contribute to a durable and sustainable settlement in whatever final form it
comes.

The people of Karabakh have already pursued the right choices on their own,
exerting hard effort toward democratic consolidation and economic
development. The recent parliamentary elections there showed the
determination to adhere to democratic principles, and this deserves
encouragement and appreciation of the international community.

The independence of Kosovo will, of course, have an impact on settlement of
conflicts in other parts of the world. However, the concerns by some within
the international community that recognition of Kosovo’s sovereignty may set
a precedent necessitating the same status everywhere are exaggerated since
each case will be judged on its own merits. After all, there have been
several examples of application of the right to self-determination, in one
form or another, both by conflicting parties and by the international
community to prevent or to settle existing conflicts. In the previous decade
alone, this right has been exercised, irrespective of the outcome, in the
cases of East Timor, Northern Ireland, Puerto Rico, Quebec, Southern Sudan,
Serbia and Montenegro, and elsewhere.

As far as Nagorno Karabakh is concerned, its distinction from other
conflicts in Eurasia is readily acknowledged by the international community.
I am convinced, and it is widely shared, that any solution to the conflict
will be based on the fact and the right of self-determination of the people
of Nagorno Karabakh, which is the core and the final settlement must take it
into account.

(Released by Armenpress on July 18, 2005)

Parliamentary hearing yield their results
By Karine Mangasarian

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

In March the National Assembly’s permanent committee on external
relations organized parliamentary hearings on the issue of Nagorno
Karabagh. Today, in the context of activation of the negotiation
process, those hearing emerge as more important. We asked the head
of the committee on external relations Armen Rustamian to comment on
the results of the hearings.

A.R. As we promised, we will prepare summary materials of the hearings
that will be published. The publication will contain two chapters. The
first chapter will present the reports and speeches heard during the
two days of the hearings in the National Assembly. The second chapter
will contain all the documents related to Nagorno Karabagh adopted by
international organizations. The committee on external relations will
convene in September and will discuss the conclusions. The conclusions
will be divided into two groups. The first one will include the
statements containing the main conceptual elements reflected in the
speeches. This can be the foundation for a conceptual approach to
parliamentary diplomacy. In this way we will have a concept on the
issue of Nagorno Karabagh. The second part will contain proposals
as to coordination of our activities in this sphere to ensure that
they are comprehensive and that Azerbaijan’ propaganda mechanisms
are taken into consideration and
properly countered. Naturally, these proposals will be directed
to the executive branch as well because the goal that we set for
ourselves was to ensure that all of us have a well coordinated and
unified position on this issue.

Q: Several statements and reports were recently made by various
intentional organizations on the issue of Nagorno Karabagh. To what
extent do the positions taken in those statements coincide with the
positions that will be presented in the concluding statements you
mentioned? A: The hearings have already yielded their results. After
the hearings, we had an opportunity to have discussions on the
Karabagh issue with two important organizations. We have already
managed to incorporate the main ideas raised at the hearings into those
documents. For instance, the joint session of parliamentary cooperation
between Armenia and the European Union and the statement adopted at
that session, the recent OSCE parliamentary summit. I think we have
made good progress in this regard. When the materials are published we
will have a unified document that can be used by our officials, members
of Armenian delegations that will be dealing with the Karabagh issue.

Q: OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs are visiting Armenia this week. What
are your expectations from their visit? A: Our position in the Minsk
Process has been formulated a long time ago and I am sure that this
visit will not bring anything new in this respect. It is too early
to evaluate the proposals that are being discussed now since no such
proposals have been officially made so far. Many crucial questions
might be discussed, certain details of the package can be discussed
before the whole package is presented – it’s too early to evaluate
this. The package should be evaluated as a whole once the interrelation
between its components and different options for resolution are taken
into consideration.

Q: Why is this issue so actively discussed? A: I think the reason is
that some of the ideas have been previously agreed upon. And when an
idea is agreed upon it speeds up the negotiation process. This might
be the idea of a new referendum. It can have different solutions;
different methods for its implementation can be used. This is the
process on which the mediators can present a proposal. But I don’t
think this will happen in near future.

The Azeri side is more active. Azerbaijan is preparing for elections
and in the pre-election period the issue of Karabagh and any such
visits are used for internal manipulations to gain political profit
and make an impression of being ready for negotiations. Because the
political forces that will reject negotiations will not be perceived
well by the international organizations.

The government’s position needs to be modified
By Mher Ohanian

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

One of the obvious developments in the reforms of the Armenian
economy is that the state is gradually driven out from the economic
domain. Meanwhile, the liberal model of the economy whereby the state
is completely driven out of economic processes can have catastrophic
results in terms of the development of the country’s competitive
potential.

The experience of the countries that experienced drastic economic
growth in the past several decades shows that in the context of
extremely harsh economic competition in the international markets,
one can only enter those markets as a competitive partner with
active assistance from the state. This excludes the absolutization
of horizontal economic coordination.

Free trade is not for the weak

The notion of freedom of trade in international economic relations
actively supported by international financial institutions and
multi-national corporations is a myth. Free trade is the best way
of realization of the monopoly of the strongest while the novices
and the weak are forced to perform secondary functions serving as
suppliers of raw materials, energy and human resources and knowledge.

In this context, adherence to the principles of free trade and
joining various international agreements without having a national
strategy can in the long run force a country to become a permanently
third-world coutnry.

It has been several years since Armenia joined the World Trade
Organization. Since then Armenia has not experienced any increase
in the competitiveness of exported goods or any improvement of their
quality. The share of high technologies exported from Armenia in the
overall volume of exports remains very small (only 0.5%).

The international experience shows that the liberal free trade, if not
anchored on principles of mutual benefit and justice, can turn into
one-sided imposition hindering the domestic producers from entering
external markets and even forcing them out of the domestic market.

This situation can be observed in some sectors of the Armenian
economy. Liberal free trade puts the countries that have modern
technologies and thus smaller production costs in an advantageous
position. The liberal model of economic policies leaves no space for
either direct or indirect support of high tech production.

On the other hand, the regulation of the exchange rate of the
Armenian dram by the Central Bank as a result of cooperation with
international financial organizations and its continuous “stability”
(more precisely hyper-appreciation of the Armenian dram) continuously
increases the negative balance of foreign trade thus causing obstacles
for improvement of the competitiveness of the domestic economy and
limiting exports.

Cyprus Greeks threaten Azerbaijan?

18.07.2005 15:52

YEREVAN (YERKIR) – The Greek community of Cyprus threatens Azerbaijan
by a direct flight to Nagorno Karabakh but they will not succeed,
Mehmed Ali Talaat, the president of the unrecognized Northern Cyprus
has told the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, according to the Azeri news
agency Trend.

He said Azerbaijan’s rapprochement with Northern Cyprus would help
offset the international isolation of the Turkish Cyprus.

On the eve of his recent trip to Russia, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan
has said that the latest steps of Baku represent Azerbaijan’s factual
recognition of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. “Hopefully,
Azerbaijan’s steps towards it would continue.”

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian studies and preservation of national values

Editorial

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

The task of the Armenian studies is to not only study its field and
“explain” to the society who they are, but also scientifically ensures
that the objects of its study and values are preserved and developed.

This is the field where absence of a scientific “prescription” could
be devastating. Today, a situation has emerged that if we fail to
formulate a living link between the sciences studying the culture and
the policies of those fields, we may soon lose the our national values.

Without the knowledge stemming from specific fields of the Armenian
studies it is hard to imagine how the values defining the Armenian
identity could be passed on and refreshed.

But without the implementation of the scientific and educational
functions of the Armenian studies, it is unimaginable how the national
values could be preserved and developed. This means that the Armenian
studies should offer the results of its findings to not only museums
and similar establishments but also educational establishments and
governmental bodies.

In this respect, the present indefinite — or even chaotic — situation
should be overcome by elaborating mechanisms of cooperation between
governmental bodies and scientific establishments as well as formulate
a proper cultural policy.

Presently, along with preservation and enhancement of cultural
heritage forming the basis of the national values, the roles of the
specific fields of the Armenian studies acquire new significance in
preserving the existing values, boosting them and passing them on,
meanwhile keeping them away from foreign influences.

In order to succeed, the modern Armenian state should work hand in
hand with the triangle science-education-culture.

Facing critical choice

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

We have a unique opportunity today to not only further the development
of our state’s and society’s development but also to raise them to
a new level. The key to it is the constitutional amendments that all
the political forces have been speaking about.

Sadly enough, some forces seem to be satisfied just by beautiful
speeches about the necessity to adopt constitutional amendments but
in reality, they may try to derail the process of that adoption,
since if the amendments package fails, we will have to continue to
live under a constitution that many view as hindering our development.

Judging from the stance of certain political circles, such possibility
should not be ruled out. And while the stance of the opposition
that had been disparaging every step of the authorities could be
comprehended in the context of political fighting, now, there is no
more logic in its position.

Since, in this case, the fight would be not against the amendments
drafted by the authorities but against the democratization process. So,
those political forces and politicians would be seen as preventing
the development of the country and their fight against any authorities
would make no sense.

Applied Armenology as a component part of national security

Yerkir
July 15, 2005

In the present-day world the precondition to secure competitiveness
for Armenia and Armenians and self-reproduction is the problem of
self-knowledge, that’s to say deep knowledge of our own country’s
history, geography, language, culture and other components of spiritual
and material identity.

Armenology is a complex of sciences investigating that field: It
forms a complete ideology concerning to cognition, preservation and
enrichment of Armenian political values.

In the present processes of mutual exclusion and interosculation
is formed a competition of “nation-values” and a new informational
reality reflecting the struggle among the civilizations. Now days
the plans of global and regional states as well as neighbor countries
with clear geopolitical and ideological goals concerning to Armenia
and Armenians turn into a conception of the nation’s history and
culture. Spreading throughout the world they often form not real
ideas about Republic of Armenia (RA) and the Armenians.

These conceptions deteriorate not only the harmony of our inner
spiritual-ideological field but also have a bad influence on the
processes carried in international institutions concerning to Armenia
and Armenians. Among these processes we must single out the political
and military-political developments in the context of Genocide and
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (Artsakh).

In these conditions the problems of Armenology overstep the limits
of scientific definitions characteristic to the previous epochs
and is re-interpreted as state strategy aiming to preserve Armenian
state interests and state security. In these circumstances of civil
competition the problems of the developments of Armenology has turned
into national security and a precondition to preserve informational
security (especially in its spiritual-cultural part) as its most
important component. Thus scientific-cognitive functions of Armenology
are conditionally divided into two parts – fundamental and applied.

The aim of applied Armenology is to use the results produced from
fundamental researches in informational, ideological and political
spheres as productively as possible and to employ it in RA national
security. In this context applied Armenology plans to realize such
systematic functions in ideological-political field which will be in
keeping with the logic of civilization clashes at the present stage of
globalization ensuring spiritual-cultural security and competitiveness
of RA and Armenians.

It’s worth mentioning that the functions of applied Armenology,
streaming from the items in informational security, don’t push the
problem of self-knowledge to the background and don’t change into a
primitive propagandistic and politicized process. On the contrary,
making the discussed scientific problems urgent, the applied functions
of Amenology internationalize and extend the existing ideas about
them in the fundamental level too. Furthermore, such a modernized
approach to the problem will further to combine different spheres of
Armenology and to develop new directions of fundamental investigations.

Among the functions realized in the context of applied Armenology
should be particularly singled out the following directions: 1. The
formation of Armenian peculiar civilization with pivotal components
of Western and Eastern system values and the ability of Armenians to
move in accordance with global processes. Elaboration and utilization
of the mechanisms necessary to develop Armenian language in today’s
assimilated environment. 2. The incessant inhabitation of the
Armenian nation in Armenian highland, which formed the ethnic
majority till the Armenian’s Genocide, and the consolidation
of the idea of succession in Armenian’s history, statehood and
civilization. The formation of the succession idea in the Armenian
nation’s struggle for existence, the consolidation and extension
of the idea of Armenian policy as an exporter of cultural values.
3. Realization of the necessity to develop the Armenian nation at
the present conditions, the usage of up-to-date net technologies for
self-organization and self-governing. To stress up the importance of
discovery and elucidation problems of Armenian identity in the context
of common perception of preservation of Armenians. 4. The elaboration
of symmetric and asymmetric approaches to withstand the strategies
contradicting our national interests in the field of Armenology.

The realization of above mentioned functions supposes successive
implementation of the complex of interconnected scientific researches
and informational processes, which will solve the problems urgent for
Armenology and will introduce the produced results to the national
and international community.

Noravank Foundation