International Eurasian Institute for Economic and Political Research
1730 Rhode Island Ave., NW, Suite 704, Washington, DC 20036, USA
tel. 202.822.9292
fax. 202.822.9393

April 14, 2004 Analytic Data

Armenia’s Foreign Policy: Complementary or Conformable?
by Tigran Martirosyan

The formulation of Armenia’s foreign policy, as with any nation, depends on
a number of variables that are commonly used in international assessment of
the rank of a nation in the global hierarchy. While somewhat mechanistic,
these variables typically include the critical mass of human and material
resources; degree of national cohesiveness based upon historical, social,
cultural, religious, and ethnic factors; economic development and density of
networks of trade; type of government and degree of openness to new ideas;
political and military capabilities comparative to neighboring states;
consistency of goals for exerting influence beyond its borders; number and
complexity of external issues, including conflicts, that a nation can handle
simultaneously; and geographical range based on location and physical reach
to other subjects of the hierarchy.

Among these variables, geographical location as a principal determinant of a
nation’s vulnerability, exercises perhaps the most powerful constraint on
the way Armenia’s foreign policy is made and on the set of the country’s
foreign policy choices. Landlocked between the Black and Caspian Seas,
Armenia is tackled with a challenge of overcoming its geographical
vulnerability made more dramatic by the scarcity of natural resources, an
ethno-political conflict, a decade-long blockade imposed by two hostile
neighbor states, socio-economic declivity, government’s inability in
instituting effectual state structures and an associated exodus of human
resources. In order to deflect the threats to its national security and
ensure development, Armenia has chosen a foreign policy centered on a
geopolitical balance among its immediate neighbors, contending regional
powers and global power centers, and multilateral organizations — all
affecting Armenia and the southern Caucasus region. The policy had come to
be known as a policy of `complementarity.’

Taken after the `principle of complementarity’ introduced in the European
Union’s (EU) Maastricht Treaty to denote cooperation between the member
states and the EU’s executive body, Armenia’s policy of complementarity —
in and of itself an inter-relation of reciprocity whereby one element
supplements the other — sought to provide equal opportunities for all
external powers with divergent interests to engage in Armenia. The elements
that Armenia’s complementarity framework entailed were the peaceful
settlement of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, expansion of membership in
international — especially European — organizations, engagement in
post-Soviet, European, and Euro-Atlantic security structures, furthering
good-neighborly relations with Iran and Georgia, regulating relations with
Turkey and Azerbaijan, and fostering regional stability and economic
integration. Distinctive of this set of elements was the uncontested foreign
policy objective to forge opportunities in Armenia and the region, in which
the interests of Russia and the West would overlap rather than branch off.

In the early years following independence, Armenia was relatively successful
in keeping a delicate balance primarily due to the `syndrome’ of immediate
post-Cold War uncertainty in policymaking circles of both Russia and the
West in regards to the former Soviet republics. In mid-1990s, however, when
their policies in the region substantiated in a somewhat fictitious format
that set the north-south axis with Russia, Armenia, and Iran vis-à-vis the
east-west corridor with the U.S., Turkey, and Azerbaijan, Yerevan engaged in
a complex balancing act with Russia, on the one hand, and the U.S., on the
other. Given the prevalence of the defense and security factor over the
economic aspect in the national consciousness of newly independent Armenia,
as well as the geopolitical proximity of Russia and closed borders with
Turkey and Azerbaijan as a result of their blockade of Armenia, Yerevan
assumed asymmetry in regulating the level of its relationship with one or
the other power. Armenia was thus able to establish positive relations with
only two of its four neighbors — Georgia and Iran, and has made a notable
progress in expanding membership in international organizations. Yet,
relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan remain hostile, and the protracted
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh slanted from principally a conflict over
self-determination between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan to a `territorial
dispute’ between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Above all, Yerevan has failed to
ensure that it maintains complementary, albeit asymmetrical, relationship
with both Russia and the West.

Armenia’s complementary relationship with these two power centers, if fitly
maintained, stipulates that Armenia develops military and security
cooperation with Russia, which Yerevan deems as an exclusive framework
guaranteeing the security of Armenia, while advancing economic cooperation,
regional integration, and democracy-building assistance programs with the
West, chiefly with the United States. However, the recent series of dubious
`debt-for-equity’ swaps that granted Moscow an unreserved ownership of
Armenia’s economic enterprises primarily in energy sector by writing off
Armenia’s debts to Russia, have reinforced the partnership between Yerevan
and Moscow thus curtailing considerably the area for expanding Armenia’s
relations with the West. Although it was evident that Russia had almost no
incentive to utilize these enterprises, including hydroelectric plants and
Armenia’s sole nuclear power plant, to full capacity or finance their
modernization, the authorities in Yerevan have bent to Moscow’s pressure to
exert control over Armenia’s economy. In doing so, the government in Yerevan
has essentially allowed a third country to attain a political dominance over
the fundamental attributes of Armenia’s national sovereignty – defense,
national security, and economy. Armenia’s foreign policy has thus
transcended distinctly from complementary to conformable.

This transition has actually invalidated Yerevan’s policy of complementarity
and is precarious because it may lead to a situation when Russia surrenders
Armenia’s national interests. With troops patrolling Armenia’s borders,
joint groups running Armenia’s security structures, companies owning
Armenia’s energy sector, and even international flights from and to Yerevan
operated by Russian `Siberia Airlines,’ Moscow may lose its interest in
Armenia. Apathetic to overly compliant authorities in Yerevan, Moscow may
try to play the Nagorno-Karabakh card in an effort to appease Azerbaijan and
drag the country under the Russian sphere of influence at Armenia’s expense.
Alongside with the U.S. that has suspended sanctions against Azerbaijan for
its blockade of Armenia and considers allocating $8.75 mln in military
assistance for Azerbaijan but only $2.75 mln for Armenia in 2005, Russia may
re-launch a mediation effort in Nagorno-Karabakh by exerting pressure on
Yerevan for greater concessions. It appears that mediators may revive a
once-contemplated project for exchange of a land corridor over Armenia
linking Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave for the Armenian-controlled
Lachin corridor connecting Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh as an option to
settle the conflict. Armenians may thus venture to lose the fruits of their
hard-won victory in the self-determination struggle in Nagorno-Karabakh, if
Armenian side ever considers this embarrassing and potentially detrimental
project seeking a settlement at the expense of Armenia’s territory instead
of a comprehensive agreement on the political status of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Amply reasonable from Moscow’s perspective, Russia’s assertiveness in
advancing a policy that meets its own national interest rather than the
interests of Armenian independent statehood, is, however, not the only
factor that contributed to the downgrading of Armenia’s foreign policy. Nor
is it the major one. There are several other, more eminent, factors.

One is the smaller state adaptation to the fluctuating geopolitical
interests of mightier states. For a smaller state with many areas of concern
such as security and diplomacy, economic choice and constraint, domestic
political institutions, and the challenges of ethnicity and nationalism, the
possible exercise of power politics, i.e. diplomacy in which the greater
nations threaten to use pressure or force in order to obtain their
objectives, has a direct implication. A smaller state tends to regard
virtually every interfering mightier state as a potential contender that may
threaten its own security, sovereignty, and fundamental national interest.
Therefore, the adaptation tactics that a smaller state applies to `mollify’
a powerful state does contain a certain degree of conformism. However, the
unremitting application of conformism as an instrument of adaptation cannot
attain the longer-term interest of a smaller state. The more effective
foreign policy tool to deter a threat likely to emerge from a mightier state
is the balance of power. When the balance is upset, as in the case of
Armenia’s relations with Russia vis-à-vis Armenia’s relations with the West,
a smaller state must consider a set of responsive actions to return to the
position of optimal equilibrium. The foreign policymakers in Yerevan have
disregarded the trivial operational precept that power must be
counterbalanced and have thus placed Armenia’s security in jeopardy, a move
that may have unrecoverable consequences for the country.

Another factor is the phenomenon of individual conformism of policymakers.
Some foreign policymakers in Armenia appear to have adopted a lop-sided
concept that in order to protect its national interest, a smaller state
should change its behavior whenever the international environment changes.
They argue that while the national interest influences what a smaller
state’s government wishes to do, it is the international environment that
determines what it is apt to do. However, the notion of national interest
must be too vague for these policymakers to follow in the decision-making,
because they are not trained or inclined to serve the national interest.
Rather, they are inclined to serve the self-interest and to appease higher
officials or external patrons whose interests often adversely affect
Armenia’s national interest. The hierarchical and co-optation practices that
govern access to higher levels of the career for these policymakers favor
conformism that stifles creativity and the capacity for their autonomous
thinking, rather than innovation. If it is true that the behavior of a
smaller state should change with the international environment, then it is
equally — if not exceedingly – true that a smaller state has extraordinary
strengths to survive in the contemporary world by maneuvering deftly and
advancing tidily its importance into greater security and sovereignty.
Application of conformism to the changes in the international environment
may be a gainful tactics in the short term. In the longer term, however, a
consistent foreign policy influenced by the international environment but
determined by the national interest is the best foreign policy.

The next factor is the apparent interest of the major power centers to deal
with submissive governments in smaller states. For both the United States
and Russia, the authoritarian or pseudo-democratic puppet regimes are
generally preferred over the governments that meet genuine liberal
democratic or national patriotic criteria, because the former are viewed as
perfectly compliant and therefore susceptible to political control and
influence. Russia plays a strong hand in Armenia not only because Armenia is
failing to attract Western investment in its economy, but also because the
U.S. is slow to take a firmer stance in developing a better-governed, modern
society and diversifying the country’s economic, foreign policy, and
security options. Instead, guided by a notion that weak societies with
embryonic democratic features are not necessarily an improvement over strong
authoritarian regimes, the U.S. is preoccupied with maintaining stability in
the region that permits Washington to advance its petroleum-oriented
interests but actually denotes stagnation in countries like Armenia. The
authorities in Yerevan have recognized and exploited to their benefit this
hidebound policy approach in which mightier states tend to impose political
control over the effective sovereignty of the smaller states. The important
point here is, however, that any artificially imposed stability ultimately
leads to regression and from there on to instability and turmoil that the
West is so fervent to avoid. Genuine liberal democratic societies that make
proper provisions for leadership succession are more stable than
authoritarian or quasi-democratic regimes that are subject to the whims of
single leaders and thus more prone to arbitrary, adventurist, and
self-defeating behavior.

The major factor of conformism in Armenia’s foreign policy is the
unpopularity of the ruling elite. The Soviet totalitarian experience fueled
into Armenia’s authorities a political culture already marked by
authoritarian traditions implying that they never experienced a political
system that could be classified as anything close to liberal or
participatory. The current political system of a strong authoritarian
presidency immune of efficient control and accountability to the populace
that has enticed most of Armenia’s ruling elite, offers widespread practice
of vote-rigging and subverting the rule of law. The disgruntled population
at large has virtually no belief in their ability to influence or change
their leadership. Therefore, the government’s veering towards Russia
essentially demonstrates the need to secure its existence in power at any
price. When a government does not summon a broad-based popular support at
home, it becomes more prone to bending under the pressure from the outside
or turn to an interested external power for protection. However, the
evidence of Armenia’s contemporary history shows that virtually no
government that reaches office through the unfair election can claim
popularity.

If Yerevan is anxious about rectifying the situation in which the balance of
complementarity in its foreign policy has been subrogated for the inertia of
conformity, it needs to enhance Armenia’s position within the evolving
triangular cooperation among the EU and NATO, Russia, and the U.S., with
stronger emphasis on the EU and NATO aspect. This aspect may enhance
Armenia’s ability to maintain an optimal balance with both Russia and the
U.S., because Europe is a power center where other major powers can come to
terms in regards to smaller states like Armenia. Agreeing that their aim is
to cooperate, not to compete, with Russia in the former Soviet space, both
Europe and the U.S. seem to take up the challenge to place greater emphasis
on Europe’s `new neighbors’ in the southern Caucasus. In all probability,
their long-term goal is to create stable and upward-moving partners — a
goal that may be as much in Russia’s interest as it is in the West’s. The
dangers facing Russia such as the nexus of terrorist and weapons of mass
destruction threats facilitated by failed states and religious extremism,
trafficking in persons, and the AIDS epidemic, are similar to those facing
the EU and NATO, and the U.S. They appear to share a conviction that dangers
are most effectively met when they act in concert. The convergence of their
interests, therefore, entitles Armenia as one of the focal players in
regional and broader European integration and security.

Recognizing Russia’s positive role in maintaining Armenia’s security,
Yerevan also needs to follow changes in the global system of security and
expand cooperation with NATO as it develops important partnerships with both
the EU and Russia. With seven members of the Partnership for Peace (PfP)
that joined the Alliance, NATO will work to refocus PfP on the southern
Caucasus, which the transatlantic community considers a front-line region in
the war on terrorism, and where PfP’s culture of cooperation and
inter-operability can make a greater contribution to the West and Russia’s
common efforts in strengthening regional security. NATO’s relations with
Europe and Russia are key to the transatlantic community’s ability to act
collectively. Just as EU and NATO enlargement have brought more security to
Europe, Russia’s cooperation with both Europe and NATO could help foster
security and political reform in the southern Caucasus and in Armenia, in
particular. Because NATO’s enlargement is not just a zonal expansion but
also a pursuit of new patterns to oppose threats that may erupt outside its
operational borders, Armenia may choose to elevate its security level by
participating jointly with NATO in confronting these threats. As the most
effective organization in the field of military and political security, NATO
potentially may offer its good offices for confidence building between
Armenia and Azerbaijan and between Armenia and Turkey.

Armenia’s foreign policy can be conformable solely to the country’s
fundamental national interest, which should be implicitly understood as
strengthening of Armenia’s independent statehood. In order to overcome its
geographical vulnerability and maintain significance to the outside world,
Armenia needs to focus on creating foreign policy alternatives by preserving
an optimally proportionate relationship with all interested states and
organizations. Conversely, a tendency to become a client state dependent on
one or the other power center has grown considerably in Armenia. It has come
to the point when Armenia is unable to defend and foster its own foreign
policy agenda that should be helping involve Armenia’s impoverished and
disenfranchised population in the state-building process by promoting
foreign investment, searching for new markets, and diversifying transport
routes for Armenian exports. It is uncontestable for probably every
sober-minded policy expert that in the harsh geopolitical location in which
Armenia finds itself, military and security cooperation with Russia is
crucial for Armenia. However, foreign policymakers in Yerevan need to come
to realize that there must be limits to Armenia’s partnership with any
country that could prevent a partnership from swerving from a mutually
profitable cooperation to a stiff patron-client relationship.

To avert such a scenario, Armenia needs to forge a domestic policy focused
on statehood-reinforcing measures to overcome the high poverty rate,
autocratic trends, and the widespread governmental corruption, complemented
by a comprehensive foreign policy seeking to increase the country’s weight
within the relationships between Russia and NATO and the West, Europe and
Russia, and Europe and the United States. In order to minimize and utterly
prevail over clientistic and conformist trends in its foreign policy,
Armenia needs to counterbalance its partnership with Russia with those
Western programs that aim to promote economic reform, encourage democratic
habits and practices, and help the people build their own civil society.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Tigran Martirosyan is a Washington-based analyst writing on developments in
broader Caucasus region and a PhD candidate at George Washington University.
Mr. Martirosyan formerly worked at the Johns Hopkins University-affiliated
Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, and held a senior diplomatic post in
Armenia specializing in the analysis of U.S. policies towards the region.

CENN – APRIL 15, 2004 DAILY DIGEST
Table of Contents:
1. Construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline is Under Way
2. Work in $130 mln Realized in Azerbaijan Section of BTC
3. Fate of City Water
4. Number of Tourists Visiting Azerbaijan Dramatically Increases
5. Earth Day Website Honors Planet with Free
6. Iran Views Construction of Gas Pipeline Through Armenia and Ukraine
to Europe as Important
7. International Treaty on Planet Genetic Resources to Enter into Force
in June
8. Call for Papers; Submission Deadline June 1 for Wetlands 2004
9. Training Courses for Development Practitioners in Central Asia and
the former Soviet Union

1. CONSTRUCTION OF THE BAKU-TBILISI-CEYHAN (BTC) PIPELINE IS UNDER WAY

Source: International News Agency Batuminews, April 7, 2004

Construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline is under way in
two sectors: on the 248-193 km. at the border with Turkey, and 0-193 km.
at the Georgian border with Azerbaijan.

A source at BTC project operator British Petroleum (BP) informs of the
involvement of `Punch Lloyd’, an Indian company, used to carry out more
extensive pipeline construction works.

The same source provides information that a 170-km stretch in the
Akhaltsikhe region of the pipeline corridor was cleaned. Pipes have been
installed at a length of 158 km. BP reports that the work is ongoing, on
schedule, and should be completely finished by the end of the year.

2. WORK IN $130 MLN REALIZED IN AZERBAIJAN SECTION OF BTC

Source: State Telegraph Agency of the Republic of Azerbaijan, AzerTag,
April 13, 2004

$130 mln has been already spent for Azerbaijan section of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan main export pipeline up to now.

The sum approximately makes up 40% of the funds envisaged for
implementation of these works. These expenses connected with lying of
pipeline and construction of two pumping stations in Sangachal and
Yevlakh region.

It should be reminded that about 200 local companies and organizations
were attracted to construction of Azerbaijan pipe run.

3. FATE OF CITY WATER

Source: The Messenger, April 15, 2004

Sakrebulo to announce decision on water management

After considering the issue for over one year, Tbilisi Sakrebulo is
scheduled to make a decision in the coming days regarding the management
of Tbiltskalkanali (Tbilisi Water Management) by the French company
Generale des Eaux (CGE) that has already won the World Bank tender to
manage the utility for ten years. In addition, the World Bank has
allotted a USD 25 million grant on renewal of the water infrastructure
in the capital. If approved by the Georgian government, the French
company will monitor how the grant is spent.

A delegation from the Tbilisi Sakrebulo visited France in early April to
familiarize itself with the activities of this company. The delegation
reported on Tuesday that it was satisfied with the company’s expertise,
adding that it is confident that Generale des Eaux will do its best to
mage the project.

According to Sakrebulo Head Zaza Begashvili, who was a member of the
delegation, the “French company does not plan to raise the tariff on
water consumption.” He also claims that if the French company receives
management rights the Tbilisi budget has the potential to save the GEL
15 million annually which it spends on Tbiltskalkanali.

Mr. Begashvili said the government demands that the French company meet
a number of conditions after assuming management. Specifically it should
supply the capital’s population with 24-hour water and maintain the
minimal tariff on water consumption. If the Sakrebulo approves the
tender awarded to CGE in Georgia, the company will be obligated to
repait the capital’s water infrastructure, including, first of all,
changing the water pipes.

Now Begashvili and other officials explain that the French company will
not privatize Tbiltskalkanali and the company will remain the property
of the government. The Labor Party has repeatedly protested the
management Tbiltskalkanali by the French company. “We have nothing
against The French company but our position is that the country’s
strategic entities should not be in the hands of foreigners,” stated the
Labor party spokesperson Gela Danelia. He adds Tbiltskalkanali “will
face the same fate as the companies in the energy sector.’ He is
confident that there are Georgian companies capable of successfully
managing Tbiltskanali and have the professional experience to do it. The
party plans to step up its protest if the city government gives the
French the green light.

CGE was officially selected in September 2002 as the winning bidder by
the tender commission after an international tender organized by the
government of Tbilisi with the support of the World Bank, informs
Jean-Patrice Poirier Director for South East Europe, Caucasus, and
Central Asia Veolia Water. However, on July 27, 2003 of this year, the
Sakrebulo halted all measures aimed at transferring Tbiltskalkanali and
announced moratorium on the issue until it could be thoroughly studied.

As Mr. Poirier explained to the Messenger by e-mail last fall, the
`contract is a partnership in which no once can force anything on anyone
but each party must agree. The first decision maker is clearly the
government of Tbilisi and one the representative body of Sakrebulo has
decided then the World Bank must agree.’

The French company clarifies that the tender did not foresee
privatization rather a public private partnership in which CGE would own
nearly nothing the public assets remaining the property of Tbilisi
government. `The present managers and employees are good but they lack
means and experience. We shall operate the local water company
transferring our know-how, technology and modern management procedures,’
says the regional director.

On the contrary CGE management explains that they have proposed an
operator tariff to the Tbilisi government to compensate the water
company for the new operation, the investments and improvements
forecasted. The Tbilisi government should decide on the consumer’s
tariff and then pay or receive the difference.’ We understand that they
are forecasting very progressive increases of domestic tariffs,’ adds
Poirier.

CGE explained last fall that they would invest USD 8 million directly
with the local company and an additional USD 25 million would be
supplied by the World Bank to the city government.

“No matter who manages the water company tomorrow, a lot of must be done
as the system as suffered due to alack of maintenance and lack of
investments over a long time,’ notes Mr. Poirier, `and if we are
invited, we shall first of all improve the efficiency of the Water
System as currently there are huge amounts of water lost. Quality and
quantity of service shall be also improved for the benefit of the
population. Then we shall organize the investments on equipment and
infrastructure so as to achieve real results in improvements of the
system, in accordance with the contract.’

Aside from the discussion over French management of Tbiltskalkanali the
company recently signed a contract with Telasi on bill unification and
already from April 400, 000 Tbilisi citizens received a new format of
bills combining both Telasi electricity bills and municipal water bills.

According to Iusa Tsartsidze, the head of Tbiltskalkanali Supervisory
Board, this gives the company a chance to improve collections on water
consumption and save money previously spent on bill collectors. The
company will pay Telasi two tetri for each dual invoice. Tsartsidze
thinks, ‘This deal is profitable for his company.’

4. NUMBER OF TOURISTS VISITING AZERBAIJAN DRAMATICALLY INCREASES

Source: State Telegraph Agency of the Republic of Azerbaijan, AzerTag,
April 15, 2004

The number of tourists visiting Azerbaijan increased 10-fold over passed
two years, representative of the head department of the Ministry of
Youth, Sports and Tourism of Azerbaijan Khanoglan Gulaliyev said.

According to the State Stats Committee, the number of foreign citizens
who visited Azerbaijan in 2003 totaled 1 million 66 thousand 299 people.
Of them, 25 thousand 543 came on a traveler’s visa against officially
registered 2294 in 2002 of total 793 thousand 345.

However, these stats are based on travel agencies’ information. The
figure would massively increase if calculations were made in accordance
with World Tourism Organization’s standards.

`Entrepreneurs arriving in Azerbaijan on a business mission must be
registered in the section `business tourism’ as well as athletes must be
included into the `sport tourism”, added Khanoglan Gulaliyev.

5. EARTH DAY WEBSITE HONORS PLANET WITH FREE

Source: State Telegraph Agency of the Republic of Azerbaijan, AzerTag,
April 13, 2004

A free gift to honor Mother Earth on Earth Day 2004 entitles any person
to receive an exceptional email every few days that contains short,
inspiring, earth-connecting quotes and comments from people in our
society’s past and present. To help people more fully celebrate this
Earth Day. People improve the nature-detached environmental and
psychological mentality we have used for the past century because it has
shown that it is not able to do the job we need to do.

“The nature-connected quotes show that people and their mentality are
part of Earth and nature,’ says Dr. Mike Cohen, director of Project
NatureConnect. When nature and its renewing powers are absent in the
environment of the human mind, even our best thinking leads us to behave
in ways that abuse Earth’s natural systems in our body and psyche as
well as in the environment. With nature’s absence, we lose its ability
to help our thinking produce the social and environmental balance we
seek, a balance common to healthy natural systems and nature-connected
people.

“Over 99% of our thinking is disconnected from and out of tune with
nature and its regenerative ways,” states the proclamation. That, it
says, is the point source of personal dysfunctions such as stress,
depression and cancer as well environmental dysfunctions such as global
warming, oceanic dead zones and war.

The proclamation urges the counseling, education and environmental
communities to become more effective by using readily available sensory
tools that emotionally reattach our mentality to nature for we do not
fight for what we don’t love.

To honor Earth Day 2004, Project NatureConnect has contributed
nature-reconnecting tools to leaders and students. Their use enables
people to think using the same organic communication process that we
share, as part of nature, with the animal, plant and mineral kingdoms.
As with them, without creating pollution or garbage, the process helps
our thinking sustain optimums of life, diversity and peace in natural
systems around and within us.

6. IRAN VIEWS CONSTRUCTION OF GAS PIPELINE THROUGH ARMENIA AND UKRAINE
TO EUROPE AS IMPORTANT

Source: PanARMENIAN.Net, April 14, 2004

Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi stated the project of
construction of a gas pipeline through Armenia and Ukraine in direction
of Europe as important. He expressed the opinion during the meeting with
RA FM Vardan Oskanian, who is on a formal visit in Iran at present. The
Iranian minister positively assessed the development of the regional
cooperation stating that its bilateral nature consolidates the community
of interests and gives rise to regional and international relationships,
Iran.ru reports.

7. COLD REALITY: NATURE (AGAIN) TURNS A BRUTAL BREATH TO VILLAGE FARMERS

Source: ArmeniaNow

The Ministry of Agriculture plans to release a damage report next week,
but already it is expected that this will be another poor year
especially for Armenian apricots. Apricot crops were below average the
past three years due to a harsh winter and floods.

Grapes, nuts, tomatoes and most fruits are expected to suffer from the
April frostbite that came after a late-March tease of unusually warm
temperatures.

The head of Plants Cultivation Department of the Ministry of Agriculture
Garnik Petrosyan, says that in addition to damage in the fertile Ararat
valley, trees have also suffered in Vayots Dzor, Kotayk, Aragatsotn and
Lori regions.

Vardan Aghajanyan has a 170-square meter greenhouse, where nothing is
green now. He took a $3,500 bank loan to finance his tomato crop.

`I would have had tomatoes in the beginning of May and I could have sold
them for 250-500 drams (about 45-90 cents per kilogram) and that was to
be my income,’ Aghajanyan says. `Each plant would have provided me with
a one-dollar profit, but nothing is left.’ Petrosyan says the government
should find a way to compensate.

`Taking into account the fact that apricot crops have been damaged for
three years and the fact that people who grow apricots could be using
lands for other purposes, we think the government must free them from
paying land tax,’ says Petrosyan.

But farmers such as Hayk Barseghyan of the Dasht village of Armavir
region are not thinking about tax, so much as lost crops.

We ran out of firewood. We burnt everything we had,’ he says, referring
to efforts to warm the trees with smoke. `We covered our greenhouses
with cellophane two times. We used all clothes and rags we had:
blankets, carpets. We covered greenhouses with everything we could find
but everything was in vain as we couldn’t save them.’

Hayk’s mother, 65-year-old Nunufar Barseghyan sits, crying, under a
flowered apricot tree, which has been frostbitten.

`I’ve been living in this village for 46 years but I never saw something
like this. How could temperature fall from +27, +30 to – 11 in April?
This was God’s punishment,’ she says.

With difficulty she opens the door of a greenhouse, where she planted
seedlings of cucumber and gord. Plants are dead with their tops hung
down onto gray ground. One candle is placed next to every cultured
plant.

`During the whole night we were lighting candles,’ Nunufur says. `Can
you imagine how many boxes of candles we lit? We wanted to keep warmth
in such a way but everything was in vain.’

They lost about $350. Hayk says they took money from the bank and left
gold as a deposit. The land is their only source of income.

And their fate is shared by most of the 800-900 villagers of Dasht.
About 60 percent of the 153-hectare area is given to gardening.

8. INTERNATIONAL TREATY ON PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES TO ENTER INTO FORCE
IN JUNE

Source: IUCN, April 14, 2004

The conservation and sustainable use of `plant genetic resources for
food and agriculture’ (or `PGRFA’) has long been recognized to be a very
critical part of our global heritage – the key to the future of human
life on earth. Efforts to ensure the continued vitality of PGRFA were
enormously strengthened on 31 March by the announcement that eleven
European countries, as well as Egypt and the EU (as a member
organization) have all ratified the International Treaty on PGRFA. This
brings the total ratifications to 48, which is more than enough to
trigger the 90 day process leading to the Treaty’s entry into force on
29 June 2004. IUCN’s Environmental Law Program, through its
Environmental Policy and Law series, is finalizing a Guide to the
Treaty, which will provide assistance to country parties in implementing
their obligations under this instrument

9. CALL FOR PAPERS; SUBMISSION DEADLINE JUNE 1 FOR WETLANDS 2004

Invitation to Submit an Abstract or Attend: Staff of federal, state,
local governments, not for profit organizations, birders, watershed
councils, land trusts, landowners, all others welcome.

NATIONAL SYMPOSIUM WETLANDS 2004:
PROTECTING WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
October 19-20, 2004. Hilton Kansas City Airport, Kansas City, Missouri

And

Field Seminar in the Central Flyway:
Wetlands in Living Landscapes
October 21-22, 2004, Great Bend, Kansas (Quivera National Wildlife
Refuge, Cheyenne Bottoms)

The Association of State Wetland Managers invites you to submit a paper
to present at the National Symposium: Wetlands 2004: Protecting Wetlands
of International Significance to be held on October 19-20, 2004 at the
Hilton Kansas City Airport, Kansas City, Missouri. An optional field
seminar will also be held to Great Bend Kansas on October 21 and 22. The
deadline to submit abstracts is June 1, 2004.

National Symposium Goals: This symposium and field seminar (optional)
will be held along the Central Flyway to help build the capacity of
states, local governments, federal agencies, and others to help monitor,
assess, protect and restore wetlands of international significance.
These wetlands include some of the nation’s most vulnerable wetlands
including Prairie Potholes, playas, bogs, and coastal salt marshes. They
include Ramsar sites, wetland-related national wildlife refuges,
wetlands in national parks, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve sites,
North American Waterfowl Management Plan sites, National Estuarine
Research Reserves, and other wetlands.

The symposium will primarily focus on the protection and restoration of
wetlands of international significance in the U.S. However, a portion of
the program will be devoted to Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. A
major emphasis of the symposium will be to develop improved cooperation
between wetland and bird protection groups. A broad host of other issues
will be addressed as well.

Call for Paper Topics: Please see call for papers announcement at the
ASWM web site at
for a
compressive list of topics and abstract submission guidance.

Abstract Submission:
Please e-mail abstracts in Word, Word Perfect, ASCII, or rich text
format to Sharon at [email protected] by June 1, 2004. Please include
the abstract title, author name(s), affiliation, street and e-mail
address, and phone number with your abstract. If more than one author
is listed, please indicate the person who will be presenting the paper.
Please be sure to include a contact person with address, phone, and
e-mail information. Also, please clearly indicate which “topic” listed
above, your abstract best fits. You will be notified by June 15 if your
abstract is accepted.

Please visit the ASWM conference web site for updates and registration
information at

If you have any questions, please e-mail [email protected] or
contact:
Sharon Weaver at 518-872-1804.

10. TRAINING COURSES FOR DEVELOPMENT PRACTITIONERS IN CENTRAL ASIA AND
THE FORMER SOVIET UNION

Developing Partnerships, 15-17 June 2004, (Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan)

Participatory M & E, September 2004, (Issyk-Kul, Kyrgyzstan)

INTRAC’s open training program has been running for more than 10 years
at locations in the UK, Europe and Africa, and now is becoming available
at venues in Central Asia, building on our experience of running a
Central Asian civil society strengthening program.

INTRAC Training Offers: A dynamic arena for reflection on issues faced
by practitioners; a rich cross-cultural exchange of experiences; focus
on regional-specific needs; an introduction to models and practical
tools for use in the workplace

Who Are The Courses For? These are primarily aimed at those based in
Central Asia and the FSU.

Participants comprise of staff from international and national NGOs,
donor organizations, support organizations and civil society umbrella
bodies

Method of Learning: Our training is participatory and uses a variety of
methods based on action learning principles such as case studies, role
play and peer support. This is complemented by presentations on
relevant theoretical frameworks and emergent thinking and trends,
delivered by a range of international consultants, providing
participants with the opportunity to locate their experiences within the
wider body of thought.

Course Fees, Language & Duration: These courses are run as either 3-day
or 5-day workshops. Fees for participants range from $490 to $700,
excluding the cost of travel and accommodation. Training is delivered
in both English and Russian.

To apply for these courses or to find out more about Intrac’s Open
Training Program in Central Asia, please contact:

Lola Umatalieva, Program Assistant, INTRAC Central Asia Program,
Regional Office, 107 Kievskaya (3rd Floor)
Bishkek 720001, Kyrgyz Republic
Tel: + 996 312 611402
Fax: + 996 312 611277
Email: [email protected]

—
*******************************************
CENN INFO
Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN)

Tel: ++995 32 92 39 46
Fax: ++995 32 92 39 47
E-mail: [email protected]
URL:

LIFE REGULATING IN THE UNRECOGNIZED COUNTRY

Azat Artsakh–Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
14-04-2004

In the past four years more than 40 million dollars of foreign
investments were made in the Republic of Nagorni Karabakh. NKR and its
economy are considered a risk zone because the international community
has not and in the near future is not going to recognize the right for
self-determination of the people of NKR, and the conflict has not been
settled yet. Prime minister Anoushavan Danielian agrees that NKR was
and remains a risk zone for foreign investors. Therefore, the prime
minister of NKR considers it necessary to find an intermediate
solution to attract investors. “In 2000 the government worked out an
economic program which works today. Tax rates were reduced. Today the
profit tax and the income tax total 5 percent,” said Anoushavan
Danielian. The economic reforms and simplification of the tax system
have produced the first results; businessmen from the USA, Russia,
Lebanon and other countries make investments in NKR. “I am opposed to
the opinion that before the settlement of the conflict Karabakh will
remain a risk zone. A certain intermediate solution should be sought
for. If NKR is considered a risk zone, then we have to compensate this
by providing so attractive conditions as to overbalance the risk,”
says Danielian. The flow of foreign investments started in 2000 and
as a result the rate of the industrial growth totaled 17 percent, in
2001 it increased to 22, in 2002 36 and in 2003 about 44
percent. These are not mere numbers, every year salaries and pensions
are increased. The investments of the provider of telephone
communication in Karabakh the Lebanon company “Karabakh Telecom” have
exceeded 10 million dollars already. Today the cellular communication
tariffs in NKR are lower and the quality of service is higher than in
Armenia. Of big investments it is worth to mention “Artsakhbank”, the
sphere of hotel building is developing at high rates. The hotel
“Nairi” was built on Australian investments, the hotel of Shoushi was
built on American investments. The hotel “Karabakh” is
reconstructed. Within a year and a half the metallurgic factory of
Drmbon was projected, built and operated. Even in Soviet years it was
impossible to build a factory in such a short period of time. Today
700 people are employed in Drmbon, 150 were invited from Armenia,
there is need for labour force. In the past 1 or 2 years the
businessmen of Armenia also make investments in NKR. Two wineries were
rebuilt in Martouni and Karmir Shouka. In total 5 million dollars were
invested in the production of alcoholic drinks in NKR. In cooperation
with the American “Lebanon Corporation” and the Russian “Armenian
Cognac” the company “Artsakhalco” realizes its production (vodka, wine
and brandy) in the USA, Russia, the CIS countries. 100 thousand
bottles are imported to Russia annually. “Last year the paltry farm of
Lousakert produced 900 tons of paltry, this year it is planned to
produce 1300 tons,” said Anoushavan Danielian. In the past two years
Karabakh had a good harvest of grain. The grain produced in 2003 is
enough to supply the NKR population during 3 years. The NKR prime
minister considers the sphere of water resources promising. “17-18
technical programs are ready, and we expect that in the coming years
investments will be made in this sphere. After the construction of the
first hydroelectric station we will manage to supply the whole
republic. In 2003 we used 150 million kilowatt energy of which 130
million was produced in Karabakh (water reservoir of Sarsang). Soon
we will be able to export electric energy. We are in the same system
with Armenia and the Republic of Armenia has exit to Georgia and
Azerbaijan,” said Anoushavan Danielian. In 2003 the budget of
expenditure totaled 12 billion 592 million drams of which receipts
totaled 3 billion 92 million, budget deficit totaled 9.5 billion drams
which is provided by Armenia (the interstate loan). It seems that
Armenia is the chief taxpayer of the NKR budget. But on the other
hand, there is no customs on the NKR-RA border and the customs of
products exported from or imported to Karabakh are paid to
Armenia. These sums are almost equal to the interstate loan provided
by Armenia to Karabakh.

TATUL HAKOBIAN.
14-04-2004

MEETING WITH NKR PRESIDENT

Azat Artsakh–Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
14-04-2004

The problems of cooperation of the Armenian General Benevolent Union
(AGBU) and Nagorni Karabakh were discussed at the meeting of the NKR
president Arkady Ghukassian, head of the organization Perj Sedrakian
and the Armenia representative of the AGBU Ashot Ghazarian. At the
meeting with the participation of the NKR prime minister Anoushavan
Danielian and the minister of foreign affairs Ashot Ghulian a wide
range of problems related to the future improvement of Artsakh and
development of the social and economic spheres were discussed. Mr.
Sedrakian pointed out the importance of the special attitude of the
Diaspora charity organizations, as well as the union headed by him. He
said that his organization is willing to assist to the implementation
of a number of social and economic programs. In his turn Arkady
Ghukassian thanked the direction of the AGBU for constant attention
towards the problems of Artsakh and especially for their active
participation in telethons. Referring to the definite spheres of
cooperation the president proposed to the AGBU to study the
possibility of modernizing the health care system and assisting to the
construction of the new building of the Stepanakert republic
hospital. At the end of the meeting the head of the state expressed
hope that the cooperation NKR-AGBU will be permanent.

AA.
14-04-2004

TALISH REVIVING

Azat Artsakh–Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
14-04-2004

On April 14, 1994 our azatamartiks managed to liberate the village
from the Azerbaijani aggressors. And although no traces of life had
remained of the former Talish, the morale of the people of Talish was
not broken. They found power inside themselves to return to their
home, rebuild it, and as they themselves say, “our home must stand
more firmly on our land”. “When we returned, we found the village
burnt, ruined and plundered. The Turks had not left behind anything of
use, either plundered or destroyed. As there are Azerbaijani villages
in the adjacent area of the village, it was easier for the aggressors
to plunder the village; they burnt what remainedâ=80¦,” say the people
whofirst stepped in Talish after the liberation. The first inhabitants
returned on June 3 ofthe same year (in the villages situated between
Martakert and Talish there was no peaceful population). They were 12,
including the mayor of the village Vilen Petrossian. According to him,
the first returnees were followed by another 13 people. “We formed a
building brigade of 25 people, with the help of lieutenant-general
Manvel Grigorian brought necessary building materials from the Turkish
villages and started the reconstruction works,” says the mayor of
Talish. One of the first steps of the few inhabitants was the common
canteen as allthe returnees as one family lived in one building as
long as the reconstruction of the ruined villages was finished. The
first 4 houses were built by the end of 1994. The priority after the
liberation was the resettlement of the village, which continues to
remain an urgent problem. Presently 150 families live in the village,
all in all 536 inhabitants, of which half are pensioners, 72
schoolchildren, 64 are children under school age. The mayor mentions
with pity that although at the beginning there was an inflow of
returnees, in the course of years it decreased and even there is
emigration caused by unemployment. In the village mainly the teachers
are provided with jobs but many of them do not have a corresponding
training. This, however, does not hinder these people who have
experienced so many hardships to instill patriotism, kindness in their
pupils, to make them ideologically healthy people. A greater part of
the population is occupied in farming. According to the mayor,
although today there is no collective farming system and each is the
owner of their land, there are common problems in the case of solution
of which only each will be able to develop their own business, be it
production of agricultural products or other. Of these problems is
water supply. Now, according to the mayor, work is done in their
direction and the problem of water will be solved within the coming
three years. According to the inhabitants of the village, there is an
inflow of the youth to the village when there are construction
works. Construction works were stopped in 2000, this year they were
resumed. 50 million drams were provided from the state budget for
building. 12 houses will be built, whereas 49 families need
homes. This year the Armenian Relief Society will build a nursery
school in the village. Talish is reviving step by step. And the
revival of each settlement is the revival of Artsakh.

CHRISTINE MNACAKANIAN.
14-04-2004

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS SOLVED

Azat Artsakh–Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
14-04-2004

The population of the Republic of NK can now watch the Armenian TV
channel “Armenia”. The executive director of “Artsakhkap” CJSC Souren
Mirzoyan mentioned that they have an agreement with the TV company
“Armenia” for retransmission of their programs. For this they have
installed a new transmitter. Several days ago the transmission was
stopped, but after the installation of necessary equipment the channel
will be broadcast without problems. “Our company is responsible for
broadcasting TV programs and tries to do it on a high level,” said
S. Mirzoyan.

ANAHIT DANIELIAN.
14-04-2004

HAS A NEGATIVE ATTITUDE

Azat Artsakh–Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
14-04-2004

The organization of Collective Defence Treaty has a negative opinion
on the prospect of deploying NATO military stations in the territory
of Azerbaijan. This was stated by the general secretary of
organization in Yerevan Nikolay Borduzha who paid a visit to
Armenia. He is against the expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia
and the South Caucasus. Moreover, the general secretary mentioned that
today there is no question of confrontation between the Collective
Defence Treaty Organization, and particularly Russia and
NATO. Evaluating the situation in the South Caucasus Nikolay Borduzha
mentioned that the situation is stable and there is no reason for
anxiety. He also announced that it is early to speak about demarcation
lines in the South Caucasus. The reason of the three-day visit of the
general secretary of the organization was to discuss the questions of
preparation for the upcoming conference of the Collective Defence
Treaty Organization in Kazakhstan with the leadership of the country.

PANARMENIAN.
14-04-2004

Discontent drives Armenia’s campaign to oust Kocharian

BY CHRISTIAN LOWE

AFP YEREVAN
April 15, 2004

Samvel Gasparian is a 56-year-old grandfather who used to support his
family by farming a smallholding in the Ashtarak region, north of
Armenia’s capital.

But his fields are lying fallow because, he says, he cannot afford to
pay for the water to irrigate his land.

“If my relatives who are living in Russia did not help me out we would
not be able to survive,” he said, choking back tears. “Some people
cannot even afford to buy a loaf of bread.”

Gasparian’s story is typical of many of the three million people in
this poverty-stricken former Soviet republic in the Caucasus
mountains.

Anger over the country’s low living standards — and the widespread
feeling that the government is indifferent — has been helping drive
an opposition campaign calling for the resignation of President Robert
Kocharian.

Comparisons have been drawn between Armenia’s opposition movement and
last year’s “rose revolution” in neighbouring Georgia, when that
country’s former president Eduard Shevardnadze was ousted in a popular
uprising.

Thousands of Armenians have rallied in the capital, Yerevan, this
month to push their demand for Kocharian’s resignation.

A sit-in protest by opposition activists early Tuesday morning outside
Kocharian’s residence was broken up by riot police using water cannon
and truncheons. Dozens of people were hurt and several opposition
leaders were arrested.

But the opposition is not giving up. It has announced plans for
another mass protest in the capital this Friday.

“The people want this,” Stepan Demirchian, head of the opposition
Justice bloc and a leader of the protests, told AFP. “They have not
been broken. If before they did not like this president, now they like
him even less.”

On some measures, Kocharian has done a decent job of handling the
economy in Armenia, which was the world’s first state to adopt
Christianity.

Economic growth has been in double digits for the past few years, in
spite of a crippling economic blockade by two of Armenia’s neighbours,
Turkey and Azerbaijan.

The blockade is linked to pogroms against Armenians by Ottoman Turks
in the early 20th century, and an Armenian-Azeri conflict over the
separatist territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.

But that growth is translating only slowly into a better life for
ordinary people.

The average monthly wage is less than 50 dollars (40 euros) and
unemployment is sky high. As much as a third of the population has
left to seek work abroad, mostly to Russia. Whole villages now stand
deserted.

For many Armenians, Kocharian is to blame. They believe a cabal of
wealthy businessmen close to the president is being allowed to enrich
itself at the expense of the poor.

Kocharian’s opponents had hoped to oust him in a presidential
election, but they were left frustrated in March last year when he won
after a second round run-off against Demirchian.

Election observers said the vote “fell short of international
standards for democratic elections.” Kocharian’s opponents said he
stole the election.

Kocharian, a 50-year-old former factory worker and veteran of
Armenia’s war with Azerbaijan over Karabakh, has stood firm in the
face of the recent opposition protests.

He has the support of the army and police, and large sections of the
population, who fear the opposition is dragging the country into
political turmoil.

But Gasparian said he would be in Yerevan on Friday afternoon for the
planned demonstration.

“I will be there, even if it costs me my life,” he said. “People do
not believe in their rulers any more because they have been deceived
so many times.”

Putin urges Armenian leader to uphold rule of law amid protests

AFP
MOSCOW, April 15

Russian President Vladimir Putin has urged his Armenian counterpart
Robert Kocharian to uphold stability and the rule of law amid a spate
of opposition protests aimed at his rule, the foreign ministry said
Thursday.

During a phone call with Kocharian, Putin “expressed his certainty
that Armenia’s leadership will be able to use a substantial saved-up
potential of democratic reforms to uphold stability and the rule of
law,” the ministry said in a statement.

The talks followed a police breakup of an anti-government
demonstration in the capital Yerevan on Monday, using water cannon and
reportedly injuring dozens of protestors.

Armenia’s opposition, which claims that Kocharian rigged a run-off
presidential vote in March 2003 to secure a second term in office, has
been staging almost nightly protests in Yerevan for the past week,
demanding that the Armenian leader resign.

Armenian authorities claim the protests are an attempt to copy the
“rose revolution” that toppled the leadership of Eduard Shevardnadze
in neighboring Georgia late last year.

PRESS OFFICE
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern)
630 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Contact: Jake Goshert, Communications Officer
Tel: (212) 686-0710; Fax: (212) 779-3558
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
April 15, 2004
___________________

Week of April 9 to April 15, 2004
* * *

ARMENIANS GATHER AT CATHEDRAL FOR EASTER

More than 1,500 Armenians from around New England gathered at St. Vartan
Cathedral for Easter services last Sunday (4/10). The celebration was
covered by a number of local and international print and broadcast
journalists. To see photos and read about Easter and Holy Week services at
the cathedral — and to see photos from Easter at the Mother See of Holy
Etchmiadzin — click to the Eastern Diocese’s website:
;selmonth=4&selyear=
2004

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/14/04)
* * *

HOLY FIRE CEREMONY CONDUCTED IN HOLY LAND

Bishop Vicken Aykazian, legate and ecumenical officer of the Easter Diocese,
represented the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the traditional Easter
Eve Holy Fire Ceremony last Saturday (4/10) in Jerusalem at the Church of
the Holy Sepulcher. Bishop Aykazian was the torchbearer, and accompanied
the Greek Orthodox Patriarch Irenios I into the Holy Tomb, where each lit
his bundle of candles from the oil lamp placed on Christ’s tomb.

The two then proceeded towards windows in the chapel of the Angel, through
which they passed candles out to the faithful from the Armenian, Greek,
Coptic, and Syrian Orthodox Churches.

(Source: Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem, 4/12/04)
* * *

PRIMATE TRAVELING TO CLEVELAND THIS WEEKEND

Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate of the Eastern Diocese, will be in
Cleveland, OH, this weekend, paying a pastoral visit to the St. Gregory of
Narek community. The Divine Liturgy on Sunday (4/18) will be followed by a
celebration of the parish’s 40th anniversary. The parish is located at 678
Richmond Rd. in Richmond Heights, OH.

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/15/04)
* * *

NEW PRIEST TO BE ORDAINED NEXT WEEKEND IN NEW YORK CITY

Next weekend (4/24-25), Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate of the Eastern
Diocese, will ordain Dn. Aren Jebejian as a priest. Dn. Jebejian, the
deacon-in-charge of St. Gregory the Illuminator Church in Chicago, IL, will
be ordained during two days of celebration at New York City’s St. Vartan
Cathedral. The events are open to the public. For more information, click
to the Eastern Diocese’s website:
;selmonth=4&selyear=
2004

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/8/04)
* * *

REMEMBERING THE GENOCIDE

Next Saturday (4/24), Armenians around the world will commemorate the 89th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks. On
Saturday (4/24), New York City’s St. Vartan Cathedral will hold a special
Martyrs Day Divine Liturgy at 10:30 a.m. followed by a requiem service at
noon. A large public commemoration will take place in New York City’s Times
Square at 2 p.m. on Sunday, April 25, 2004. Other remembrances will occur
throughout the Eastern Diocese. For more information, call your local
parish and click to the Eastern Diocese’s website Calendar of Events:

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/14/04)
* * *

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE GENOCIDE

The Diocese’s St. Vartan Bookstore has a variety of resources to help you
and your family learn more about the Armenian Genocide. From academic
essays to books for children to Hollywood movies, you can find what you need
on the bookstore’s website,

For a list of recommended reading on the Genocide, click here:
;selmonth=4&selyear=
2004

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/15/04)
* * *

TURKISH AUTHOR TO SPEAK AT DIOCESAN CENTER TONIGHT

The Diocese’s Zohrab Information Center and the Tekeyan Cultural Association
will host author Kemal Yalcin today (4/15). The Turkish writer’s bold new
book, “You Rejoice My Heart,” is based on interviews with survivors of the
Armenian Genocide. A free reception will follow the discussion of his
courageous book, which will begin at 7:30 p.m. at the Diocesan Center, 630
Second Ave. at 34th St. in New York City.

During the evening, Mr. Yalcin will sign copies of his new book. Also, a
limited supply is available from the St. Vartan Bookstore and can be shipped
to you signed. To buy your copy today and learn more about his book, click
to:

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/15/04)
* * *

RETREAT FOR 13-17 YEAR OLDS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

The Eastern Diocese’s Youth Ministry Program will hold a retreat this
weekend for New England’s ACYOA Jrs. — kids ranging from 13 to 17 years
old. The retreat — led by Yn. Arpi Kouzouian, coordinator of youth
outreach for the Eastern Diocese — will be in Contocook, NH, and will focus
on the idea of stewardship. The young Armenians will examine the gifts God
gave them, and how those gifts can be used in service to the church
community. For information on this retreat or to organize one in your area,
e-mail Yn. Kouzouian at [email protected].

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/14/04)
* * *

APPLY TO SUMMER CAMP TODAY

Spaces are going fast at the Diocese’s St. Vartan and Hye Camps. To save
your child’s space today, click here:

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/15/04)
* * *

TRAVEL TO ARMENIA THIS YEAR

Traveling to Armenia strengthens your faith and dedication. If you haven’t
gone yet, there are five opportunities this year.

In June:

* Young Professionals Trip — June 12 to 26 / $2,250. Specifically designed
for travelers between the ages of 23 and 40, this trip offers a chance to
see the sights of Armenia and build life-long friendships with other
Armenian American professionals. Call the Fund for Armenian Relief (212)
889-5150.

* Diocesan Pilgrimage to Historic Armenia and the Republic of Armenia —
June 17 to July 7 / $3,450. Travel to Istanbul, historic Armenian locations
in modern day Turkey such as Musa Dagh, Cappadocia, Mt. Ararat, and Ani.
Continue to Armenia to tour important historical and cultural sites. For
more information call Armen Aroyan (626) 359-9510.

* Armenia Service Program (ASP) — June 22 to July 15 / $1,980. A unique
opportunity for Armenians between the ages of 18 and 28, to help run a
summer camp in the village of Yeghegnadzor before touring throughout
Armenia. Call Nancy Basmajian (212) 686-0710.

In September:

* Women’s Guild Pilgrimage to Armenia — September 16 to 27 / $2,400. Tour
Etchmiadzin, Yerevan, ancient holy sites, and current cultural activities.
For more information call Ann Devejian (203) 838-5758.

* Pilgrimage to Armenia — September 18 to October 3 / $2,350. A
Diocesan-sponsored trip to all the highlights of Armenia. For more
information call Sidon Travel at (818) 553-0777.

To get more information on any of these travel opportunities, e-mail
[email protected].

And don’t forget — you can also help fund the trip of a young person in
your parish, who will return more eager to be involved in parish life.

(Source: Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), 4/15/04)

# # #

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress