ARMENIAN REPORTER
PO Box 129
Paramus, New Jersey 07652
Tel: 1-201-226-1995
Fax: 1-201-226-1660
Web:
Email: letters@reporter.am

March 3, 2007 — From the front section
All of the articles that appear below are exclusive to the Armenian Reporter

1. With new law, Armenia allows dual citizenship
Dual citizens can vote; men must serve in armed forces
by Tatul Hakobyan

2. U.?S. Army Specialist Carla Babayan is laid to rest in Hollywood Hills
37-year-old soldier was killed during a tour of duty in Iraq

3. Turkey continues its fight against H. Res. 106
Members of Congress decry Turkey’s threats as "outrageous"
by Emil Sanamyan

4. Freedom of expression advocates urge Turkey to abolish 301
Article 301 prosecutions continue after Dink’s murder

5. A look at the Azerbaijani military: More money, more problems?
News analysis by Emil Sanamyan

6. Mass burial debate continues
by Talin Suciyan

7. A joint Armenian-Turkish study on the Genocide is proposed – but
will it go forward?
by Chris Zakian

8. Armenia is preparing for clean elections
International IDEA is training the trainers

9. Give us this day our daily bread
Armenia at Work by Armen Hakobyan

10. Rep. Sherman says the vote on the Genocide resolution is up to the Speaker
And Karabakh’s future status is up to Armenians

11. Commentary: Karabakh: Between the status quo and reforms
Whom will Artsakh choose as its new president this summer?
by Hrachya Arzumanian

12. Commentary: A month of flowers
Living in Armenia by Maria Titizian

13. Paul Chaderjian joins the Armenian Reporter as Features Editor
Will lead new California Bureau

14. A letter from the Editor: A new format for the Armenian Reporter
by Vincent Lima

15. Editorial: USC Trojans show the way

********************************************* ******************************

1. With new law, Armenia allows dual citizenship
Dual citizens can vote; men must serve in armed forces

by Tatul Hakobyan

YEREVAN – On Monday, February 26, Armenia’s National Assembly adopted
a bundle of laws allowing dual citizenship.

Under the new laws, citizenship is available to any individual over
the age of 18 who has been a permanent resident of Armenia for the
past three years, can express himself or herself in Armenian, and is
familiar with Armenia’s constitution.

A simplified procedure is available to people of Armenian origin,
people married to Armenian citizens, the parents of Armenian citizens,
people whose parents were once Armenian citizens, and those who
voluntarily renounced their Armenian citizenship after January 1,
1995. Individuals in these categories also must be familiar with
Armenia’s constitution.

Citizenship can also be bestowed without any conditions on individuals
who have made an exceptional contribution to Armenia.

The Armenian constitution adopted in 1995 prohibited individuals from
being citizens of Armenia and other states at the same time. This
meant that Armenian citizens who moved abroad could not take on a new
citizenship without facing the loss of their Armenian citizenship.

The constitution also promised individuals of Armenian origin "a
simplified procedure" for acquiring Armenian citizenship. But the ban
on dual citizenship meant that they would have to renounce their other
citizenships in order to acquire Armenian citizenship.

A constitutional amendment adopted in November 2005 lifted the ban on
dual citizenship. The constitution now says "The rights and
responsibilities of citizens with dual citizenship shall be defined by
law." Those laws were finally adopted this week.

The vote on February 26 was 66 in favor, 5 opposed, and 1 abstention.
The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) and the Republican Party `
two of the three parties that comprise the governing coalition `
supported the measure. The United Labor Party, the third member of the
coalition, voted against it, as its amendments had been rejected.

The opposition Orinats Yerkir and Justice parties, some unaffiliated
members of parliament, and some members of the Republican bloc sat out
the vote. The National Unity party did likewise.

* Obligations and rights

Men who have served in the armed forces of any country for 12 months,
or have performed alternative service for 18, are exempt from
conscription when they acquire Armenian citizenship. But present
Armenian citizens who acquire citizenship and perform military service
elsewhere are not exempted from military service in Armenia.

Dual citizens cannot run for the office of president in Armenia, nor
for membership in parliament, nor can they serve as a member of the
Constitutional Court. But they can serve in the government – even as
prime minister.

The bundle of laws was proposed to parliament by the government. But
the Republican Party, which is the largest member of the governing
coalition, was in favor of a number of amendments. Some Republicans
were opposed to granting dual citizens voting rights; others insisted
that dual citizens should have to live in Armenia a certain number of
years before having the right to vote.

"A person votes to decide his or her own fate. People whose fate is
tied into another country’s processes – how can they vote on other
people’s fate?" asked Tigran Torosyan, chairperson of the National
Assembly during the days between the first and the second, final
reading of the bills.

Mr. Torosyan did not believe that people who are citizens only of
Armenia and people who are citizens of Armenia and other countries
should have equal rights. He offered two reasons.

"First, Armenia exists today thanks to the people who live here and
bear all the difficulties," Mr. Torosyan said. "We should never forget
that as representatives we are obligated to the people who live in
Armenia, and that should be reflected in the laws we pass.

"Second, when people vote, that has to do in the first place with
deciding their fate. The process in Armenia decides the fate of those
people who live in Armenia. The right to vote is the right to
determine one’s own fate and one’s own process, and there should be a
difference in this sense."

Under existing law, however, Armenian citizens who live abroad do
retain the right to vote, which they can exercise at Armenian
consulates in foreign lands.

The Republicans say that they are not opposed to dual citizenship, but
want to be clear about the rights and obligations of dual citizens.
Representative Gagik Minasyan, for example, said that dual citizens
should not be deprived of the right to vote, but the Republican Party
proposed that the right should be limited to dual citizens who spend
at least 183 days a year in Armenia, "so the voter is led not only by
emotions but also feels the influence of the elected officials on his
or her skin."

The only Republican who voted to abstain was Samvel Nikoyan. He said:
"They say that before we vote on this bill we should know how we are
going to look our diaspora Armenian relatives in the eye. But we are
much more obligated, and it is much more important to ask, how we are
going to look [native] Armenian citizens in the eye."

In one of his speeches, Mr. Torosyan said that no one is opposed to
dual citizenship. "People are under the impression that there is
tension in this hall between the ARF and the other members of the
coalition. There is no such tension. First, recall that the ARF did
not propose this law; the government [as a whole] did. Second, the
disagreements are about details, which are important, but there is no
disagreement on the fundamental issue."

The deputy chair of the National Assembly, ARF Bureau member Vahan
Hovanissian, agreed that everyone is in favor of dual citizenship and
that the debate is about the details. He added that the government
cannot end up with "some illogical percentage" of dual citizens as
ministers when the elected officials who determine the composition of
the government – the president and the members of the National
Assembly – cannot be dual citizens.

In private conversations, Republicans leave the impression that they
are strictly opposed to dual citizenship. It is also well known that
the ARF prepared the framework for dual citizenship. To avoid the
impression that the law is only in the party’s interests, the
coalition made an internal decision to present it in the name of the
government, in the person of Justice Minister Davit Harutiunian.

Mr. Harutiunian, who just recently joined the Republican Party, spoke
repeatedly of what he termed an "historic opportunity": "We mustn’t
lose the historic moment. If the National Assembly supports this bill,
it will take an important step toward restoring historical justice,
and will add to the number of Armenian citizens, which will speak only
to making our country more powerful," he told the National Assembly.

Gurgen Arsenyan, leader of the coalition-member United Labor Party,
and the members of his bloc say that they consider the rights of
people who are citizens of Armenia alone to be primary. Dual citizens
should not be able to serve as prime minister or minister, he said.
"We find this to be a partial retreat from Armenia’s
self-Â – determination."

Grigor Harutiunyan of the Justice bloc argued that dual citizens
should not have voting rights. "People who live abroad should not have
the right to determine the fate of people who live on Armenia’s soil,"
he said, adding that he agrees with Mr. Arsenyan that dual citizens
should not be part of the government. He said his bloc was not opposed
to dual citizenship in principle, however.

* The right to vote

The law that was adopted allows dual citizens who are registered as
residents of Armenia to vote like any other citizen. (All residents of
Armenia are required to register with the authorities.) Dual citizens
who are not registered will not be allowed to vote.

Almost all of the proposals made by the ARF were included in the final
package. The party voted in favor of the law. But it remained
dissatisfied. In particular, it argued that the requirement that
voters who are dual citizens be registered at a specific residence is
unconsititional. It promised to make such a case in the Constitutional
Court.

Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian, who became a citizen of Armenia in
1998 (and under the law at the time, renounced his original
citizenship to do so), is in favor of the law – and more. "I am for
Armenian citizens and all dual citizens to have the right to vote
under our law," he said. "In granting dual citizenship, we mustn’t
create new categories, giving more rights to some, and fewer rights to
others. For all, we must create a level playing field in terms of
rights and obligations."

Former Foreign Minister Raffi Hovannisian, likewise a foreign-born
Armenian who adopted Armenian citizenship, is in favor of dual
citizenship with clear cut definitions of rights and responsibilities.
"The dual citizen should have the same rights and obligations as other
citizens; he must carry out his obligations to his fatherland through
compulsory military or alternative service. For the right to vote or
get elected, a certain minimum residency requirement must be set. I am
in favor of the introduction of dual citizenship as a citizen, as a
lawyer, and as a former diaspora Armenian," Mr. Hovannisian said.

Another former foreign minister, Alexander Arzumanian, is concerned
that many Armenian citizens will become citizens of Russia and owe
allegiance to that state.

(At a forum on dual citizenship organized last June by the Armenian
International Policy Research Group (AIPRG), Professor Andranik
Migranyan of the Moscow State University of Foreign Relations (MGIMO)
addressed this concern. He pointed out that up to 2.5 million
Armenians already live in Russia. The fact that they faced loss of
citizenship did not deter young Armenian men from taking Russian
citizenship all these years, he noted. Why insist on a deterrent that
does not work? Professor Migranyan asked.)

Mr. Arzumanian dismissed the view that dual citizenship will increase
the investments of diaspora Armenians. "It is the mentality of the
orphan. The diaspora is a cow to milk, yes? The diaspora has helped
all this time, but using it more means what? We should do nothing and
say, Let the diaspora come give us money?"

And what does the regular citizen of Armenia think?

Armen Vartanyan, 37, most of whose relatives live abroad, is dead-set
against dual citizenship. "Under the constitution, the citizens of
Armenia must be equal. The institution of dual citizenship violates
that principle, because unlike me, the dual citizen can vote in the
elections of two or more countries. The dual citizen makes me live
according to laws of his choosing and goes to live abroad. My parents
and grandparents made their choice in favor of the fatherland. In the
difficult 1940s, they left Greece and Egypt and moved to Armenia.
Every Armenian should have the right to live and vote in one country.
Dual citizenship assumes irresponsibility," he said.

Another Yerevan resident, historian Armen Manvelyan, takes the
opposite position. Dual citizenship is a necessity for Armenians and
the Armenian state borne of Armenian history.

"We could say it is ‘forced’ on us by our history, and to reject it is
to be afraid to look our reality in the eyes. It is to deny the
existence of the diaspora. The Armenian state can be strong and
survive in our territories only if these two components, Armenia and
the diaspora, work together and in unity. Dual citizenship is a
component of that unity, and it should be accepted and help Armenia
become stronger," Mr. Manvelyan concluded.

** SIDEBAR: Special residency status

Armenia has for over a decade offered a special status to ethnic
Armenians who are not citizens of Armenia. They may apply for special
residency status, renewable every 10 years, which confers to them most
of the rights of citizens. They may enter the country for any length
of time without a visa; they may accept employment; and they may buy
and sell land. The main rights they do not have are the right to vote
and be elected in national elections, and the right to form, join, and
finance political parties. They are not subject to conscription in
Armenia. The fee for the special status is just over $300.

** SIDEBAR: Setting the bar
At a forum on dual citizenship organized last June by the Armenian
International Policy Research Group (AIPRG), Peter Spiro, Dean and
Virginia Rusk Professor of International Law at the University of
Georgia, said that "the experience of other states shows the virtues
of liberalizing dual citizenship policy¦. The diaspora can contribute,
and dual citizenship is an important tool."

But the diaspora is in a position of strength, Professor Spiro warned.
They generally don’t need citizenship; they have a desire, but not a
need. "For most of the diaspora, a formal connection with the state is
of little material value. For them, dual citizenship is a strictly
optional proposition." It may have important symbolic value, but that
is unlikely to balance out against high or even moderate cost,
especially if the citizenship offered is second class, i.e., excludes
voting rights.

"These are people who can continue to call themselves Armenian, go to
church, be active, visit the country, etc., without being citizens."
Citizenship is something the state can use as a tool to strengthen
itself. But if the cost is too high, the diaspora will not do it.

********************************************* ******************************

2. U.S. Army Specialist Carla Babayan is laid to rest in Hollywood Hills
37-year-old soldier was killed during a tour of duty in Iraq

GLENDALE, Calif. – Army  – Reserves Specialist Carla Babayan was a proud
soldier. Proud to wear her country’s uniform. Proud to serve in the
military. Proud to be sent to Iraq.

The 37-year-old daughter of immigrant Armenians was supposed to return
home to her family in Southern California this month. Instead, her
life was cut short when her military vehicle accidentally overturned
in Tallil, southeast of Baghdad.

Joining the military had been a lifelong dream for Carla. She and a
friend met with an army recruiter right after graduating from
Glendale’s Hoover High School in the late 1980s, but they didn’t
follow through. They were not ready then.

Two years ago, Carla decided she was ready, and her goal was to serve
the military in Iraq. She had studied mechanical drafting and worked
for the structural engineering firm owned by her father, Edmond
Babayan. And like her father, who had served as a Marine, she wanted
to join the military before the cutoff age for the Army Reserves.

After finishing basic training in South Carolina, Carla was deployed
to Iraq and assigned to deliver supplies, food, fuel, and equipment to
combat soldiers. She was often seen atop Humvees and other military
vehicles that she drove or protected as a gunner.

Carla was a Southern California native and grew up in Glendale. She
studied ballet, took riding lessons, and loved animals, children, and
nature. Her mother Emmy Aprahamian says she was a sweet soul who cared
about doing good for everybody.

Her squad leader, Sgt. Frederick Moore, says she loved the Army, and
was loved by her fellow soldiers for her optimism, serenity in the
face of danger, and unflagging high spirits. "She was always first to
help with the biggest of tasks, and always greeted you with the
biggest smile."

Carla was laid to rest at Forest Lawn Memorial Park, and her funeral
drew hundreds who were hoping to welcome her back home a few weeks
from now.

******************************************** *******************************

3. Turkey continues its fight against H. Res. 106
Members of Congress decry Turkey’s threats as "outrageous"

by Emil Sanamyan

WASHINGTON – A barrage of Turkish threats, warnings and fears over the
congressional resolution affirming the U.S. record on the Armenian
Genocide (House Resolution 106) continues. But congressional
proponents are standing fast in their support for the measure that has
been endorsed now by 176 House members, but is still yet to receive
formal congressional consideration.

The U.S. capital is continuing to bear the Turkish version of "human
wave" attacks over the anticipated congressional action on the
Armenian Genocide resolution. From the top general of the Turkish
Armed Forces, to formally independent media, to local chapters of
Turkish students’ associations – there is an urgent effort to stop H.
Res. 106.

The campaign is taking place in the context of an ongoing standoff
between the mildly Islamist government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyib
Erdogan and Turkey’s nationalist-secular establishment, led by the
Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, and in effect backed
by the former ruling political parties now in opposition.

The latter forces are arrayed against the anticipated bid by Erdogan
for Turkey’s presidency this May. Since Erdogan’s party has a majority
of seats in Parliament, which in Turkey elects the president, hardly
anything short of a military coup could stop the election.

Erdogan’s government is likely to be blamed if H. Res. 106 passes
because of its cozying up to Iran and the Palestinians, and
simultaneous distancing itself from the U.S. and Israel. But current
relations between the U.S. and the Turkish military may be even
rockier over developments in Iraq.

As a result, both Turkish political camps are fighting hard against
the resolution to reaffirm their nationalist credentials in an
election year. Visits to the U.S. by the foreign minister and armed
forces chief are being followed by dozens of Turkish Parliament
members.

In addition to lobbyists already on its payroll, the Turkish
government is also encouraging businesses with interests in Turkey and
other concerned groups to oppose H. Res. 106 as harming U.S.-Turkish
relations.

* Jewish organizations reluctant ‘to take on a losing battle’

The Turkish media and commentators continue to claim that both Israel
and Jewish American organizations have promised to provide
back-channel support against H. Res. 106.

Zeyno Baran of the Washington-based Hudson Institute claimed that "the
American Jewish lobby¦will be helpful because if the resolution
passes, many Turks will also blame them for not helping, and this can
further deteriorate relations between Turkey and Israel."

According to the Jewish daily Forward, Turkey’s officials gave Jewish
American organizations a similar message during a February 5 meeting
in Washington – that not only the U.S., but Israel too would suffer
should the resolution pass.

But representatives of Jewish American organizations told the Forward
that they made no commitment to fight the resolution, and that "the
Jewish community is paying lip service to Turkey on this issue, since
all the organizations agree that little can be done to block the
resolution [and they] are reluctant to take on a losing battle."

* Administration distances itself from Congressional vote

At his February 16 press conference in Washington, Gen. Buyukanit said
he was satisfied with the Bush Administration’s opposition to H. Res.
106.

At the same time, the State Department began to distance itself from a
potential congressional vote. Asked on February 7 if U.S.-Turkish
relations would be harmed by the resolution, as Turkish Foreign
Minister Abdullah Gul has argued, Assistant Secretary of State for
Public Affairs Sean McCormack responded: "Well, that’s his
assessment."

McCormack added that while the Administration is conveying Turkey’s
"sensitivities" to Congress, "the Turkish government is well aware of
our system of government, and they understand that Congress is an
independent branch."

But H. Res. 106 is far from being the only or even the most
contentious issue on the U.S.-Turkish agenda. There appear to be
irreconcilable differences on Iraq. The Turkish military wants the
U.S. to put pressure on Kurds in Iraq, and the U.S. can hardly afford
to do that considering the difficulties the U.S.-led coalition is
currently experiencing.

* Members of Congress protest "outrageous intimidations"

In a letter made public on February 8, co-chairs of the 148-member
Armenian Caucus Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) and Joe Knollenberg
(R-MI) protested what they described as the "shameless threat" made by
Turkish officials to cut off supplies to U.S. forces in Iraq should
the resolution pass.

The letter decried Turkey’s interference with U.S. congressional
debate as "completely inappropriate," and urged congressional leaders
and the Administration to reject such "outrageous intimidations."

The House Committee on Foreign affairs chaired by Rep. Tom Lantos
(D-CA) has yet to schedule a hearing or a vote on H. Res. 106. Lantos,
who met with both Foreign Minister Gul and General Byukanit, "has not
yet made a decision regarding this resolution," said his spokeswoman
Lynne Weil, as cited in the Forward on February 23.

The Forward further cited congressional sources as predicting that if
"Rep. Lantos tried to block the genocide resolution in committee,
[House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi would ask him to move it to the House
floor for a vote and he would end up agreeing."

Rep. Lantos has a mixed record on affirmation. A Holocaust survivor,
Rep. Lantos nevertheless has opposed affirmation measures in the past,
citing Turkey’s strategic importance. But in 2005, when a nearly
identical resolution received Committee consideration, Rep. Lantos
supported it, citing Turkey’s obstructionism of U.S. policies.

*************************************** ************************************

4. Freedom of expression advocates urge Turkey to abolish 301
Article 301 prosecutions continue after Dink’s murder

PARAMUS, N.J. – Istanbul’s Radikal daily reported on February 21 that
in the last 21 months, 12 people had been sentenced under Article 301
of the Turkish Penal Code, which criminalizes speech that is perceived
to insult Turkish national identity. Another 18 cases are pending.

The first person sentenced under the law was Ibrahim Guclu, the
spokesperson of Kurd-der, a Kurdish organization. His sentence was
one-and-a-half years in prison.

The latest victim of the law is Aydin Engin, a writer for the
Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos. He is being tried for saying, "I want to
go to Paris and say ‘there is no Armenian genocide’ and return to
Turkey to say an ‘Armenian genocide was committed." The French
legislature is considering a law that criminalizes the denial of the
Armenian Genocide.

* Joint action statement

Meanwhile, the international freedom of expression community is
circulaing a joint action statement. For the text and the names of the
signatories, go to or to

*********************** ************************************************** **

5. A look at the Azerbaijani military: More money, more problems?

News analysis by Emil Sanamyan

Editor’s note: This is a second article on the subject. The first
column appeared in the Reporter’s February 14, 2007, issue and focused
on the relationship between Azerbaijan’s growing oil production and
its military spending.

WASHINGTON – Azerbaijan’s military spending grew from $146 million in
2004 to an estimated $1 billion in 2007. Most of this money has
officially gone toward raises in officers’ salaries and improving
soldiers’ conditions of service. (A future column will discuss
Azerbaijan’s weapons acquisition.)

The purpose of spending over $2 billion in four years, in addition to
the Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev’s often-stated desire to
overtake Armenia’s total state spending, must be to improve the
discipline, sense of purpose and fighting efficiency of the armed
forces.

Azerbaijani officials and sympathetic observers boast that such
improvements have taken place. President Aliyev and his lieutenants
have for years claimed that Azerbaijani armed forces are superior to
the Armenian military. In an effort to illustrate this point the
Azerbaijani government helicoptered a group of Westerners to the Azeri
side of the Line of Contact (LoC) in 2005.

Glen Howard of the DC-based Jamestown Foundation came back impressed
that the Azeri officers he spoke with were educated "in the West,
speak English, and are very bright." Speaking last October at Johns
Hopkins University, Howard endorsed the Azerbaijani official view that
the widely held perception of Armenian military supremacy was a
"myth."

Like Mr. Howard, military journalist Scott Taylor of the Canadian
Esprit d’Corps magazine never visited the Armenian side of the LoC.
But he was on the Azeri side twice – in July 2006 and again last
month. He writes that both Baku-based Western military attaches and
former Azerbaijani soldiers are critical of the Azerbaijani army’s
readiness.

In one example, a 22-year-old who just completed his tour of duty told
Mr. Taylor that he had "lack of respect for the [Azerbaijani]
government and lack of confidence in [Azerbaijani] officers.?.?.?. We
had only 40 days of basic training and then we manned the front lines
for 18 months." (Armenian conscripts are deployed to the LoC after six
months of training.)

These flaws in training, as well as reports of widespread corruption,
may explain in part why the Azerbaijani press is inundated with
negative coverage of developments in the military.

* Collusion with the enemy

Young Azeribaijans born in the 1980s, raised in the 1990s, and now
being drafted into the military have experienced nauseating amounts of
state propaganda about the "Armenian enemy."

Unlike members of older generations, hardly any of these young men has
ever met an Armenian or even seen an Armenian on television. The
Azerbaijani government regularly censors out "Armenian themes" from TV
programs broadcast by foreign channels into Azerbaijan. Russian and
even Turkish performers with suspected Armenian roots are barred from
the country.

So it takes a special kind of desperation for young Azerbaijanis in
uniform to seek relief from Armenians. Five Azerbaijani servicemen
risked minefields and sentries to cross the Line of Contact in 2005
and all were imprisoned on "treason" charges upon their repatriation
to Azerbaijan.

Nevertheless, three more Azerbaijani servicemen crossed over in
December 2006. Two of these have since been repatriated and are now
facing "treason" charges. The third is refusing repatriation and is
reportedly seeking asylum.

According to findings published in the Baku newspaper Zerkalo, the
Azerbaijani government reported or otherwise failed to cover up 35
peacetime deaths in 2004, 39 in 2005, and 48 in 2006 – the vast
majority of these cases of fratricide, suicide, or "accident." In the
first three weeks of 2007 there were eight additional fatalities.

Many more young Azerbaijanis are avoiding military service or paying
bribes to be placed in what are known as "elite" units in the capital
Baku.

* Elite unit corruption

One such "elite" unit is the 112th Security Brigade of the Azerbaijani
Defense Ministry based in Baku and used to guard government buildings
and other installations. Servicemen from this brigade have also served
in U.S.-led peacekeeping operations in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
Many of the officers have received at least some training in Western
military colleges.

But this unit too has been gripped by scandals. According to the Turan
news agency, the brigade first came under investigation over the case
of one of its non – commissioned officers (NCOs) who served with the
150-person peacekeeping unit deployed as interior guards inside a
perimeter secured by U.S. marines at a hydro – electric plant in Iraq.
After this NCO converted to Christianity, he was "recalled to
Azerbaijan, accused of treason, and fired from the army."

Last September, one of the brigade’s senior officers, a lieutenant
colonel, talked to investigators looking into the NCO’s case,
providing them with charges of widespread corruption. The officer was
quickly demoted and shoved into a much less "elite" unit in one of the
provinces.
Last month, this officer went to the press. Apparently, some
Azerbaijani commanders embezzle the salaries of their soldiers serving
in Iraq. These salaries are underwritten by U.S. taxpayers to
encourage as many countries as possible into the U.S.-led "Coalition
of the Willing."

According to this and other brigade officers, the Azerbaijani
"peacekeepers," some of whom bribed their way to serve in Iraq
presumably to earn higher salaries, are engaged in looting of the
Iraqis and even stealing from U.S. servicemen.

This is just one of dozens of allegations made by senior officers to
become public in just the last two to three years – presumably the
period of significant increases in these officers’ salaries.

* Leadership problem?

Much of the Azerbaijani media commentary targets Defense Minister
General Safar Abiyev as being at the root of problems in the military.
Mr. Abiyev has been in his position for 12 years – longer than any
defense chief in the region and possibly the world. While for years
there have been rumors that Abiyev’s dismissal is imminent, he has
remained in the post, most likely because of his total loyalty to the
ruling Aliyev family and possibly because there are few alternatives.

In these 12 years the Azerbaijani military has gone through a series
of purges with thousands of senior military and security officials
accused of disloyalty and imprisoned since the 1990s. The latest purge
has been underway since 2003. Virtually none of the officers with any
military credentials earned during the Karabakh war remains in the
military or other security agencies.

Amid the current disarray, Zerkalo newspaper claimed recently that the
Azerbaijani government would be inviting a senior Turkish military
officer to straighten out the military. But Turkish generals have
tried to fix the Azerbaijani military since 1992 with little to show
for it so far.

******************************************** *******************************

6. Mass burial debate continues

by Talin Suciyan

In October 2006 a mass grave was found in Dara/Nusaybin in Turkey. No
investigation was done to identify the remains. After the mass media
brought the matter to the attention of the public, Prof. Yusuf
Halacoglu of the Turkish Historical Society (THS) claimed that the
burial remained from Roman times, adding that THS is ready to form an
international group of experts to conduct a site investigation.
Meanwhile, Prof. David Gaunt of Södertörns University gave several
interviews to the Turkish media, arguing that the remains may belong
to Assyrians, Chaldeans, or Armenians. Mr. Gaunt based his argument on
the historical incidents known to have happened in that area, and
added that only a site investigation could determine the provenance of
the bodies. Mr. Gaunt’s presumptions were challenged by Mr. Halacoglu,
who claimed they could not be correct.

As a response to Mr. Halacoglu’s challenge, in January David Gaunt
wrote a letter to the THS, stating that he would appreciate to be a
part of an international researchers’ group. Mr. Gaunt had three main
requirements: First, researchers should have full access to any site
that could have the probability of being a mass grave; second, to
interview the local people concerning the mass grave; and third, to
have full independence in investigating the burial and the area around
it. Mr. Halacoglu accepted the requirements, and both sides were to
set up dates for starting the research. A couple of days after this
mail correspondence, Hrant Dink was killed and the process stopped.

On February 11, Yusuf Halacoglu was in the headlines of Hurriyet daily
newspaper, announcing the cooperation between Sweedish and Turkish
historians, after almost one month. Right after this, on February 13,
another news item appeared in Hurriyet, this time concerning the dates
proposed by Mr. Gaunt. He had proposed to start the field work between
April 23 and 25, 2007. Hurriyet’s title for the news item was,
"Sweedish professor’s cunning of 24 April."

After both news items appeared in Hurriyet, Mr. Gaunt issued a press
release and wrote a letter to Mr. Halacoglu.

Mr. Gaunt’s press release summarizes the process from October to this
date and continues as follows:

"After the first news was spread, authorities cordoned off the cave
and only some government agencies had access. Finally in December the
site was closed off and the opening was buried. The head of the
Turkish Historical Society (TTK), Professor Yusuf Halaçoglu challenged
my suggestions and insisted that the bodies found were from Roman
times. Thereafter he made many statements to the press challenging a
Swedish delegation to investigate the site. This intensified after a
debate in the Swedish parliament on December 12, 2006, which was based
on reports in Turkish press (not upon my initiative, as some
mistakenly believe).

"In mid-January 2007, I sent up a trial balloon to see if there was
any substance to the TKK statements and I proposed to start
negotiations on making a joint investigation. It was apparent that the
only way any independent scientist would have to study the grave was
through some sort of collaboration with the TKK. I am fully acquainted
with its abysmal track record on the Armenian-Turkish issues and was,
and still am, very hesitant. We had not progressed further than
discussing the possible dates for an initial planning meeting, when
Hrant Dink was assassinated. I immediately put these negotiations on
ice. Apparently, however, the TTK is very hot to pursue this matter
and today has gone to Hurriyet revealing the very small amount of
progress we had up until the assassination and making some further
provocative and totally inappropriate statements.

"This investigation of the mass grave must be seriously planned. If
the TTK wants to rush in and do an incomplete job in a hurry, there
will be no reason for me to continue negotiations. For the sake of
legitimacy alone, the TTK cannot expect to do the investigation all by
itself and use the independent researchers only for PR purposes in
attempts to influence public opinion. I envision a long scientific
investigation with international co-operation. This first meeting can
only begin the process of identifying the long lost victims in that
mass grave."

Further, Mr. Gaunt wrote a letter to Mr. Halacoglu and stated that
there are very difficult issues, such as the budget, the size, the
qualifications, and the composition of the investigation team, the
cooperation of local universities for offices and for adequate storage
of the remains during the investigation, the organization for the
search for DNA among people whose ancestors might be in the grave. He
wrote "Perhaps I overstate my position, but for clarity it will be
impossible for us to call this a joint effort, and it risks the
legitimacy of the whole enterprise, if the TTK takes on all
responsibility for the investigative work and the independent
researchers are kept at arms length, until there is a press
conference."

Mr. Gaunt thinks that there have been previous investigations done by
the Turkish government delegations and he wrote he would like Mr.
Halacoglu to share the findings. "Please correct me if I am wrong, but
I have reason to believe that there have been several Turkish
government delegations that have already inspected the grave. You made
statements yourself, so I assume the TTK participated. It would be
very useful for our common planning if you could send over copies of
whatever material there is in whatever form, which has already been
assembled."

In the news item that appeared in Hurriyet, it was claimed that Mr.
Gaunt initiated the debate in parliament on the mass grave in December
2006. In the letter, Mr. Gaunt points out that only members of
parliament can initiate a debate, and as he is not a member of
parliament, he cannot do so. It was the initiative of members who read
the articles appeared in the media.

As far as the dates are concerned, Mr. Gaunt said to Nokta weekly
magazine that he proposed April 22`26, including the arrival and
departure dates, and for field work April 23`25. "I have managed to
clear the time 22`26 April by cancelling some speaking engagements in
the United States for which I already made preparations to be away
from the university. That the dates include April 24 has to do with
the nature of my research and the several speaking engagements which I
have had to cancel in order to accommodate the Turkish Historical
Society’s insistence on meeting soon with me. If it was only a matter
of a one-day meeting in a major city, then I could of course have
suggested other times like a weekend."

Mr. Halacoglu has suggested that based on the outcome of the
investigation, the ones whose statements proved to be wrong should
publicly apologize. Mr. Gaunt reminded him that in scientific circles,
new interpretations, new facts, new materials, new techniques, and
unexpected results can always happen, and scientists learn from them
and are not embarrassed by new knowledge. He underlined that as
historians, they must first pay respect to the past and honor memory
by identifying whoever is enclosed in these long-lost graves, whatever
ethnicity they happen to have had.

* * *

Talin Suciyan is a correspondent for Istanbul’s Nokta magazine. She
reports from time to time for the Armenian Reporter.

*************************************** ************************************

7. A joint Armenian-Turkish study on the Genocide is proposed – but
will it go forward?

by Chris Zakian

PARAMUS, N.J. – Last week may have seen the start of the first joint
scholarly project by an Armenian historian and a Turkish historian
who denies the Armenian Genocide. Though at this writing it is not
certain that the joint venture will actually go forward, Ara Sarafian,
of the United Kingdom’s Gomidas Institute, and Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu,
the head of the Turkish Historical Society, have both commented
publicly that they would welcome the opportunity to collaborate on a
historical investigation.

According to Mr. Sarafian, the possibility of a collaborative study
was brought up during a March 2006 conference at Istanbul University,
where Mr. Sarafian – a leading authority on the Armenian Genocide and
editor of a critical edition of the British Parliamentary Blue Book,
The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915`16 – was asked
by Dr. Halacoglu about cooperating on joint projects regarding the
events of 1915.

Mr. Sarafian agreed, but nothing further transpired. The subject came
up again when Mr. Sarafian was interviewed in February 2007 by the
Turkish journal Notka; he outlined the conditions for what he would
consider a serious and rigorous study.

Last week the Turkish newspaper Sabah put the question to Mr.
Halacoglu, who responded that he would accept such a proposal.

In a press release issued on February 26, Mr. Sarafian set forward the
parameters for a study that would be acceptable to him and to
disinterested scholars. Earlier, he had posed a question that the
study could seek to settle. "The Turkish official thesis maintains
that the deportations of 1915 were an orderly affair and all relevant
records on those deportations can still be found in Ottoman archives
in Turkey. According to the formal administration of deportations,
there should be lists of all deportees, village by village, person by
person, showing when people were deported, where they were sent, and
how they were resettled. There should be records of their original
properties and how they were compensated at their places of exile."

Mr. Halacoglu would have to produce these records.

The parameters of the study, as formulated by Mr. Sarafian would be
the following:

First, Mr. Sarafian would present Mr. Halacoglu the relevant records
that explain why he thinks the events of 1915 in Harput should be
called "abuse," "massacre," and "genocide," and not simply a
deportation program.

Second, Mr. Halacoglu would present Ottoman records that detail how
deportations were implemented in Harput and its surrounding villages.

Third, both parties would critically examine the materials presented
in each set of records, to see if either one can make a convincing
case.

Transparency of the proceedings, and openness to the broader scholarly
community, would be critical conditions of any collaboration, Sarafian
underlined.

As of this writing, Mr. Halacoglu has not unambiguously given his
assent to these basic parameters.

In the meantime, the prospect of such a joint collaboration has
received mixed reactions – especially in Armenian quarters, where some
insist that it could play into the hands of Genocide deniers who would
relish the opportunity to claim that the historicity of the Genocide
is in some sense an "open" scholarly question.

A balanced, though cautious, view was expressed by University of
Michigan historian Professor Gerard Libaridian, who in reply to the
inquiry of the Armenian Reporter wrote: "In principle, any effort to
produce and exchange documents is welcome; this problem requires
debate and exchange in a variety of formats. To succeed, however, any
project requires clear – and usually modest – goals, lucid
intellectual underpinnings, scholarly integrity, and teamwork."

Mr. Libaridian added: "We have seen a few such projects fail in the
past. Halacoglu, for example, does not inspire confidence as a
historian, while Sarafian seems to be taking on Halacoglu, i,e., the
Turkish state, all on his own. This area has suffered tremendously
from a number of problems. The most important of these is the
confusion between the politics of Genocide recognition and scholarly
pursuits."

*********************** ************************************************** **

8. Armenia is preparing for clean elections

International IDEA is training the trainers

YEREVAN – In anticipation of Armenia’s May 12 parliamentary elections,
28 professional trainer-facilitators are being trained in Armenia.
Those who pass the two-week intensive course will be able to help the
Central Electoral Commission train election workers.

The training program, which runs through March 2, has been undertaken
by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
(International IDEA), an intergovernmental organization based in
Stockholm.

Under a memorandum of understanding signed between the organization
and the Central Electoral Commission in May 2006, IDEA’s office in
Armenia has also published a training manual. The training course and
the BRIDGE Armenia Manual are adapted from an international BRIDGE
curriculum created by the Australian Electoral Commission, IDEA, and
the United Nations Electoral Assistance Division in 1999. BRIDGE is an
acronym for Building resources in democracy, governance, and
elections)

BRIDGE Armenia is focused specifically on the experience and needs of
Armenia. It uses an activities-based adult learning method to build
capacity and enhance professionalism. The training is global in scope
and seeks to use comparative examples to illustrate options and best
practices. Guiding principles for election administration such as
impartiality, accuracy, and transparency are incorporated into the
course activities.

Connect:

** U.S. Embassy holds training on preventing, detecting, and
investigating election fraud

For text, go to

******************************* ********************************************

9. Give us this day our daily bread

** Introducing the series, "Armenia at Work"

Work is a way to make a living. But it is also a way to realize one’s
potential, a way to express oneself, a way to do something useful with
one’s life no matter one’s nationality, religion, sex, and party
affiliation. The expression, "peaceful, constructive labor" means a
lot today in Armenia, a country still making the difficult transition
from one economic system to another, a country still blockaded, a
country that still has high unemployment, still suffering from the
shock of the 1990s and the consequences of the war. Especially for our
people.

The salt of our earth, working people. Working people with their
quotidien concerns, their problems, their joys. In this series, we
tell you their stories as they are.

** Give us this day our daily bread

by Armen Hakobyan

YEREVAN – The smell of lavash rises like a prayer from the mouth of
the clay tonir. Earth, fire, and water tell their ancient tale. The
tale of bread. Little bubbles swell on the thin layer of dough
clinging to the hot wall of the tonir. One. Two. They don’t escape
Zoya’s expert gaze. The bread is done. A second later, the piping hot
sheet of lavash is lying on top of the others, adding to the
appetizing aroma that seems to have permeated even the stones of the
bakery.

Armanoush, Zoya’s sister, has already used a rolling pin to flatten
the next ball of dough. She hands the round layer of dough to her
sister. Zoya takes it and plays with it like a juggler. One. Two.
Three. Four. A miracle passed on from generation to generation. And
the dough is a thin layer exactly the size of the board it will cover.
With a practiced hand, Zoya drops it on the board and sprinkles some
water on it.

"The tonir is still too hot. I sprinkle the water so the lavash
doesn’t stick to the wall of the tonir," smiles Zoya, and in one deft
motion attaches the future sheet of lavash to the wall.

You feel like you’re part of an ancient, mysterious ritual. There is a
primeval, pagan, divine inspiration in all this. In Armenia, one of
first places wheat was cultivated, lavash has always been baked. In
the 5,000-year history of our national existence, there has been no
change in the ingredients of lavash `flour, water, salt – nor in the
way it is baked, nor in the simple joy of fresh-baked bread.

The ring of Zoya’s cellular phone and the click of my camera suddenly
dissipate the 5,000-year-old prayer and bring us back to the 21st
century. "Yes, Mariam jan," Zoya takes the call. "She’s already in the
ninth grade. She does well at school," the proud mother says, adding
that her daughter wants to study foreign languages in university. She
sets the phone aside and quips, "I have become a remote-control mom."

She picks up another round of dough and the prayer is back: "Give us
this day our daily bread."

For the rest of this heavily illustrated essay, go to

************************** *************************************************

10. Rep. Sherman says the vote on the Genocide resolution is up to the Speaker
And Karabakh’s future status is up to Armenians

On February 28, Rep. Brad Sherman (D.-Calif.) gave a quick interview
to our Washington Editor Emil Sanamyan. Below is the transcript of
that interview, followed by facts about the member of Congress.

Reporter: What are the chances for the Foreign Affairs Committee
consideration of H. Res. 106 in the near term?

Rep. Sherman: I think ultimately it will be a decision made by Speaker
Pelosi. If either Speaker Pelosi or [Foreign Affairs Committee]
Chairman [Tom] Lantos want, [the resolution] goes forward.

Reporter: What is the indication of the position taken by Chairman Lantos?

Rep. Sherman: I think that the chairman’s position is not known to me
at this time. The Speaker – and she is obviously much more important
to this process ultimately [for the resolution] reaching the House
floor [to be voted on] – has been supportive of this resolution
consistently in her term in Congress. I do know that the State
Department is going to try to change Speaker Pelosi’s mind.

Reporter: Technically, can this resolution go to the House floor
without Committee consideration?

Rep. Sherman: I would think that if Speaker Pelosi made it clear that
she wanted it on the floor the Committee would act first. Yet, if for
some reason the Committee did not act and the Speaker wanted it on the
floor, it will be on the floor

Reporter: What is your reaction to the threats made by Turkish
officials over this resolution?

Rep. Sherman: I believe French-Turkish relations improved after France
passed the Genocide resolution, and I can’t imagine why the outcome
would be any different for the United States.

Reporter: And your reaction to the Bush Administration’s opposition to
this resolution?

Rep. Sherman: History is history, and it doesn’t change because
certain [military] bases are strategically well-located. And if you
want to be the world’s only superpower, you have to stay true to the
truth. If instead the truth is something you negotiate, it is hard to
think that the world is going to acquiesce in [the United States]
being the only superpower.

Reporter: You have long supported Armenian-American issues. What are
the reasons for that support?

Rep. Sherman: Because the last act of genocide is genocide denial.
Because those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Those who
obscure it are doomed to repeat it. Because Hitler was able to turn to
his inner circle and say, "Who remembers the Armenians?" And if we
don’t remember the Armenians, then Hitler will have correctly observed
that ignoring the first genocide of the 20th century paves the way for
other genocides. Finally, because the ultimate Turkish acknowledgement
of the Genocide is good for Turkey.

Because, where would the United States be if we denied slavery? Or if
we denied that we had committed genocide against quite a number of
Native American peoples? I would hope that if not in the resolution
itself, [then] in the mix of discussion about the resolution, this
resolution will be a humble resolution. With the humility of an
Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, where we stand up and say, look, the
United States has committed great crimes in its past, and other
countries have as well, and it is time to acknowledge what happened in
the Ottoman Empire.

Not as if we who point it out do so out of a sense of overbearing
smugness. We should not be passing this resolution in smugness. We
should be passing it because it is the truth, and because there is a
lot of truth about the United States that we also have to acknowledge.

Reporter: Turning to another issue on the minds of many
Armenian-Americans – the Karabakh conflict. How do you see it
eventually resolved?

Rep. Sherman: I am not aware of any earth-shattering developments
regarding Artsakh. It was tantalizing when [the parties] came close to
an agreement [in the past].

The United States has got to disabuse the Azeris of the view that they
are going to pump a lot of oil and get a lot of power and somehow
create new realities. We should be re-doubling our efforts to serve as
an intermediary, to try to have this issue resolved.

I think that the people of Artsakh have made it plain that they want
to live in an Armenian state. Whether that is an independent, second
Armenian state, or whether it is fully incorporated into the Republic
of Armenia – it is for the Armenians to decide.

Reporter: Is ongoing U.S. security assistance to Azerbaijan
undermining regional stability, and should Congress take a closer look
at these assistance programs to Azerbaijan?

Rep. Sherman: First and foremost, you should require parity [in
security assistance to Azerbaijan and Armenia] at least, if not
favoritism of Armenia, which I think has been far more willing to
settle the conflict than Azerbaijan. Aid to the military of Azerbaijan
could be a problem, and aid that did not at least enshrine parity
would be worse. Given the fact that Azerbaijan is participating in the
blockade of Armenia, I would like to see zero military aid. Certainly,
military aid to Azerbaijan is not a good idea; but departing from
parity is even worse.

** SIDEBAR: Facts about Rep. Brad Sherman

Constituency: Represents California’s 27th district, located in the
northern suburbs of Los Angeles, including parts of Sherman Oaks,
Burbank, Northridge, Tarzana, Granada Hills, and Sunland.

Role in the 110th Congress: Chairman of the Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation, and Trade. Original
co-sponsor of House Resolution 106, affirming the U.S. record on the
Armenian Genocide.

Personal details: Born in 1954, in Los Angeles. Jewish. J.D. from
Harvard University, 1979. Attorney, accountant. Single.

***************************************** **********************************

11. Commentary: Karabakh: Between the status quo and reforms
Whom will Artsakh choose as its new president this summer?

by Hrachya Arzumanian

STEPANAKERT, Nagorno-Karabakh Republic – From a distance, the ongoing
campaign for the presidential succession in Artsakh may appear
sluggish. But this is a false impression. The upcoming election,
expected to take place in July 2007, may become a breakthrough of
sorts in the political evolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, and
it is already capturing the attention of Artsakh’s society.

The two terms of President Arkady Ghoukasian were in effect a period
of political transition. In this decade (1997 to 2007), the citizens
of Artsakh were looking for ways out of the state of war and a degree
of relaxation from the years of total mobilization of local resources.

Mr. Ghoukasian’s presidency succeeded in softening this largely
painless transition from postwar military rule – in itself an
objective and unavoidable stage in Artsakh’s development – towards a
fledgling civil society. The military and security agencies have been
eased out of politics and the economy, marking a return to a sense of
peacetime normalcy.

The upcoming elections will to a great degree determine the future of
Artsakh’s statehood. And this is in large part the explanation for the
mostly unnoticed tension in Artsakh’s society that is growing from day
to day. Artsakh is facing at least three scenarios.

The first scenario is the continuation of the status quo, with the
local power elite maintaining the existing trends – which will likely
result in stagnation and the gradual erosion of past achievements.

Another scenario would entail the rise of reformers who would be able
to make the necessary policy changes – providing Artsakh’s statehood
with fresh momentum.

The third and, at this time, the least realistic option is a potential
return to quasimilitary rule, which would result in a deterioration of
the gains made thus far by Artsakh’s civil society.

* The contenders

At this time, there are three main forces contesting for support of
the Artsakh electorate: the ruling administration, the political
opposition, and the largely nonaligned civil society.

The five individuals discussed here have yet to formally announce
their intentions to seek the presidency, even though their names
routinely top local opinion polls. It also cannot be ruled out that
alternative candidates may emerge in the next several months.

Parliament Speaker Ashot Ghulian and National Security Service
Director Bako Sahakian appear to be the most likely establishment
candidates.

With his democratic image and potential, Ashot Ghulian has an
opportunity to maintain the general trend toward democratization. At
the same time he is seen as not sufficiently charismatic to be able to
appeal to Artsakh’s society and win the necessary support for reforms.
Should Mr. Ghulian succeed in creating a professional team that can
plan and carry out reforms – a challenge shared by all the candidates
` the "charisma deficit" may yet be compensated for. But in the
absence of such a team, Mr. Ghulian may not be able to convince the
society at large that he does in fact stand for progress, rather than
for the status quo.

Unlike Mr. Ghulian, Bako Sahakian is not a public figure, but one who
is acutely aware of the real mechanisms driving Artsakh’s society.
Should he emerge as a formal candidate, Mr. Sahakian would need to
exert significant effort in image-building, particularly outside
Artsakh, where he is largely unknown. But this is very much an
achievable task. Should Mr. Sahakian succeed, this will present an
opportunity for fast and popular reforms, along the lines of the
achievements of Vladimir Putin’s presidency in Russia. [Editor’s note:
While Putin may be unpopular in the West, he has enjoyed consistent
popularity in Russia.]

The emergence of Deputy Foreign Minister Masis Mayilian as the
preferred candidate of Artsakh’s civil society represents a new and
significant change in local politics. Mr. Mayilian has a real
opportunity to become a public politician and is seen as having the
best potential as a reformist candidate. He is charismatic, has the
needed team-building skills, and maintains positive relations with
most of the local power brokers. Mr. Mayilian’s remaining challenge is
to convince Artsakh’s political establishment that he is the most
promising candidate.

The opposition is represented by Parliament members Armen Sarkisian
and Vitaly Balasanian.

Armen Sarkisian is one of the leaders in the local chapter of the
Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), but he appears to lack the
personal characteristics that could make him a strong contender for
the presidency. The ARF’s political influence in Artsakh today is also
insufficient to play the leading role this party once enjoyed in
Artsakh. But its role remains significant when it comes to
coalition-building – especially should none of the presidential
candidates win outright and there is a second round.

Retired General Vitaly Balasanian is a respected combat officer who
has a reputation for honesty and loyalty to Artsakh’s cause. At the
same time, Mr. Balasanian lacks the experience of public politics. And
as a military man his attitudes may appear incompatible with existing
trends in Artsakh. With military threats to Artsakh seen as not
imminent, much of the electorate has no desire to return political
power to the generals. As a result, the Balasanian candidacy is likely
to suffer.

Certainly a vigorous political system is very much in evidence in
Artsakh. All the candidates for the presidency will have to contend
with this reality. The political competition in Artsakh is not solely
a contest of individuals, but of political forces offering a variety
of approaches to Artsakh’s development, along with associated
policies.

This is a relatively new phenomenon for the young Armenian state, and
one for which President Ghoukasian deserves much credit. His
endorsement of a specific candidate may play a decisive role in how
Artsakh’s political forces consolidate and build alliances ahead of
the elections. These forces are now caught in anticipation of the
administration’s decision.

But the time for this decision is quickly running out. Unless the
president makes the endorsement in the very near future, his decision
may become irrelevant and be overtaken by the momentum of the election
campaign.

In any case, the contest for the presidency of Artsakh is likely to be
both dynamic and dramatic.

* * *

Hrachya Arzumanian, PhD, an expert in national security and complex
systems, lives and works in Stepanakert. This is his first
contribution for the Armenian Reporter.

*************************************** ************************************

12. Commentary: A month of flowers

Living in Armenia by Maria Titizian

A month of festivities and observances await women in Armenia. It all
begins with International Women’s Day on March 8 and culminates on
April 7, Mother’s Day. There will be the standard-issue round tables
organized by nongovernmental and international organizations,
conferences, art exhibitions, concerts, meetings, discussions, and
debates. These events will attempt to raise public awareness, to
address serious concerns about the lack of women’s involvement in the
political, economic, and social life of the country, to tackle the
thorny reality of women’s reproductive health, discrimination in the
labor market, lack of access to productive resources, absence of women
in the private sector and the list goes on. All of these events,
however, will pale in comparison to the most important custom of the
day – the passing out of flowers. This time-honored tradition is one
that some women hang on to unabashedly. Any comment or suggestion that
receiving flowers on International Women’s Day, when women are absent
from all or most decision making in the country is rather hypocritical
comes at a great cost to she who dares question the mystique behind
this flower-giving and flower-receiving practice. In the end, the real
beneficiaries of this ritual are the flower vendors who set up shop on
almost every street corner of the city during the heady days of
celebration.

Being a woman in Armenia is tricky business. Being a diasporan
Armenian woman can leave you scratching your head in disbelief.

Don’t get me wrong. I like receiving flowers as much as anyone else
and it doesn’t grate my sensibilities when I receive flowers as a
gesture of love, gratitude, friendship, or whatever. But the whole
spirit of International Women’s Day seems to get lost amidst the
blooms. The country faces serious problems when it comes to gender
issues. The culprit is not the constitution or the laws or the
international agreements that the Armenian government has signed. In
fact, under the law in all instances women are granted equal status to
men. Women are not barred from education, are not required to wear
burkas, nor are they paid less than men in the public sector. On the
contrary, 60 percent of all those who hold graduate degrees are women,
rates of women’s enrollment in undergraduate studies are higher than
men, and one just needs to stroll about the campus at Yerevan State
University to see that freedom of dress is expressed much more freely
than in most "developed" nations. There seems to be a something askew
in the country’s value system.

In a recent report on measures to improve the situation of women in
the South Caucasus, the Committee for Equal Opportunities for Men and
Women of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe found
that Armenia comes in last, after Azerbaijan and Georgia, when it
comes to the representation of women in parliament: the rates were 4.6
percent in Armenia (6 out of 131 members of the National Assembly) as
opposed to 10.5 percent in Azerbaijan and 9.4 percent in Georgia.
There is only one woman cabinet minister and a handful of women deputy
ministers.

This same report also stated that there is a prevalence of violence
against women, discussion of which, according to the report, is "still
largely taboo." Currently there are no state statistics on domestic
violence owing largely to the fact that in a majority of cases, the
violence is not reported. Society does not yet want to come to terms
with violence against women for an array of reasons stemming largely
from cultural traditions, pride, and the sanctity of the family. I
have trouble understanding this mentality, for if there is violence in
the home, then what or whose sanctity are we protecting?

Unlike domestic violence, which at least is acknowledged to exist,
widespread sexual discrimination is a nonissue. Abortion continues to
be a measure of regulating fertility; one just needs to talk to any
gynecologist to understand the severity of the situation. Many women
are having multiple abortions during their childbearing years. A
recent report by the World Bank regarding the reproductive health of
women found that 55 percent of all pregnancies are artificially
terminated.

Perhaps one of the most critical issues facing women in Armenia is
poverty. The same World Bank report finds that 53 percent of all the
poor in Armenia are women, 66 percent of the unemployed are women `
the highest percentage of female unemployment in the Caucusus. While
both men and women in Armenia are at risk of poverty, the risk factor
for women-led households is much greater. Today 30 percent of all
Armenian households are women led, an exceptionally vulnerable segment
of society, at risk of finding themselves in extreme poverty by 33%.

Women and business? Prepare to be astonished. Of all businesses, 0.3
percent are owned by women. Perhaps this is not so surprising,
considering women did not benefit from privatization, and persisting
rigid gender roles continue to dictate what productive resources men
and women have access to.

As a woman who up until 6 years ago lived in North America, I never
thought much about issues of equal rights, poverty, discrimination, or
domestic violence. It was always somebody else’s problem. Generations
of women before me had laid the groundwork for the women’s movement
which placed these issues on the public agenda, and although they
weren’t always successful, they undeniably aided in the advancement of
women in all areas of life.

As an Armenian living in North America I never thought much about
these issues either because I existed in the insularity of community
life which was concerned with prolonging Armenian language and culture
and raising funds to build centers, churches, and schools.

However in Armenia if we do not have a serious and comprehensive
public discourse by both men and women about the persisting gender
imbalance, it will invariably have a negative impact on society in the
long run. When half of society’s potential is not utilized, when women
do not have a voice in the country’s decision-making bodies, when
women do not have a role in public-development policies and in the
development of economic strategies, then to expect a reduction in
poverty, improvement in good governance, sustainable growth, or an
increase in productivity is akin to settling for spring flowers to be
delivered on International Women’s Day.

There is an abundance of wisdom in the Armenian saying, "Spring will
not arrive with a single flower." Wouldn’t it be something if every
flower given this year could represent one woman who has made a
difference, who has taken the chance, who has demanded to be heard,
who has dismantled stereotypes, who has made a sacrifice? It is true,
a single flower will not bear the promise of spring, just as a single
voice will not be heard over the din of rhetoric, but a bouquet of
voices when arranged just so can not only move the heart, but can move
mountains.

********************************* ******************************************

13. Paul Chaderjian joins the Armenian Reporter as Features Editor
Will lead new California Bureau

PARAMUS, N.J. – Paul Chaderjian has joined the editorial staff of the
Armenian Reporter as Features Editor, the newsweekly’s editor Vincent
Lima announced. Mr. Chaderjian is responsible for the paper’s new
weekly Arts & Culture section. In addition, he heads up the Reporter’s
new California bureau.

"Since early December, readers have been exposed to Paul’s fresh and
lively writing, his talent for finding interesting people and telling
their stories," Mr. Lima said. "He has also been recruiting the
correspondents that have been enriching our coverage of the arts and
of Armenian life in California. We are very excited to have him as a
colleague."

For the past three years, Mr. Chaderjian worked in Yerevan as manager
of English-language programming at Armenia TV. In addition to this
role, he anchored a daily half-hour English-language newscast, hosted
a daily English-language talk show called "Hotline," and regularly
contributed to CNN’s World Report.

Prior to his work with Armenia TV, Mr. Chaderjian was a news writer
and producer for ABC News’ "World News Now" in New York City and was a
reporter and producer for television stations in Fresno, California.

"Thanks to Mr. Cafesjian, John Waters, Bagrat Sargsyan, Vincent Lima,
and all of my colleagues at Armenia TV and the Armenian Reporter, all
I have ever dreamed of doing in my career since childhood in film,
television, broadcast and print journalism are now part of my daily
work experience," Mr. Chaderjian said. "What makes this even more
rewarding and gratifying is that the legacies of my late father, and
my relatives and the ancestors we all lost during the Genocide will
never disappear from the collective memory of humankind. Through our
work in media, our stories will be passed on to future generations of
Armenians, will become part of the collective history of humankind,
and help Armenians around the world be part of a virtual community
that only modern-day media technologies would make possible."

Mr. Chaderjian has a master’s degree in journalism and mass
communication from California State University, Fresno, and an
undergraduate degree in cinema and television production from the
University of Southern California. He is one of the hosts of the
Hayastan All-Armenian Fund Thanksgiving Day Telethon and has regularly
contributed to Armenian media outlets, including the Armenian
Reporter, Asbarez, and Armenian International Magazine, where he
served as managing editor.

"The Reporter is looking at California as a very significant market.
Having someone of Paul’s accomplishment and obvious talent there is
very important to us," said  – Sylva Boghossian, publisher of the
Armenian Reporter. "We are thrilled to have him on board."

************************************ ***************************************

14. A letter from the Editor
A new format for the Armenian Reporter

Dear Reader:

Managing Editor Chris Zakian and I were sitting in Paramus one Friday
in early January. The paper had gone to press, and we could squeeze in
some time to talk about the new format of the Armenian Reporter. In a
touching gesture, Sona Boghosian, the sister of the newspaper’s late
founder Eddie Boghosian, had made us surj.

We were discussing headlines in the new format. Will we stick with the
title style, as in, "Egoyan Awarded Oscar," or will we switch to
sentence style, as in, "Egoyan is awarded an Oscar"? "The current
format is crowded, so it needs the brevity and the capitals of the
title style," Chris said. "But the cleaner lines of the new format
will support sentence-style headlines."

Good. We’re in agreement.

It’s a week later, and I’m in Yerevan. They have delivered the round
table – and the rest of the furniture – for the new Armenian Reporter
newsroom there. On the table there are copies of the Guardian, the
beautifully designed British daily, the Christian Science Monitor, and
a few Armenian-American weeklies. I plunk a few colorful copies of the
Reporter on top. These are samples printed in New Jersey by one of the
printing plants we were testing.

Grigor Hakobyan, our art director, frowns. He pulls out a little
magnifying glass and spends some time acting like a diamond appraiser.
Does he think it’s a cubic zirconia? Not quite. The black-and-white
pages are crisp. A joy to behold. But the text on the color pages is
fuzzy. We’ll have to deal with that problem before the next trial run.

Nareh Balian, our layout assistant, is pleased. She came up with the
logo that spans the top of the front page of the Community section,
and it looks good.

Paul Chaderjian, our features editor, has gotten an electronic copy of
the new arts section. He drops me an email. "vincent, it’s so awesome.
now i’m excited! ok. here are the missing captions."

I’m excited too. It has been nine months, and we’re due.

We started planning this transition last June, in a conference call.
Publisher Sylva Boghossian and then`Managing Editor Aris Sevag were in
Paramus. John Waters, vice president of the Cafesjian Family
Foundation, was in Minneapolis. I was in my apartment in Yerevan. We
had just announced, in the first editorial after CS Media acquired the
newspaper, "Our goal is to create a new era of Armenian journalism. To
do this, we will offer a newspaper that is reliable in content,
scrupulous in separating fact from opinion, and relevant to today’s
Armenian American, regardless of his or her age."

We were committed to better content. And we had to have a format that
supported that content.

Over the gestation period, here’s what we came up with.

* Use a new typeface – legible, elegant, and versatile – throughout
the paper. Tradition calls for a different typeface for headlines, but
we’re breaking that rule.

* Stay with the tabloid (11 x 17 inch) format, except for the arts
section, which is 8?½ x 11 inches.

* Make consistent use of five columns (on a 10-column grid) in the
news pages, and four columns (on a 12-column grid) in the commentary
pages. Some leeway in the arts pages.

* Print in full color the front, back, and center pages in the main
and community sections; color throughout the arts section.

* Introduce a bold new flag (logo) for the paper.

* Front page. In addition to the top two stories of the week, the
front page carries pointers to other interesting stories. Some of the
pointers come with summaries of the story they point to; others with
an image that captures your imagination.

* National and international news. After the front page, you will find
articles on what is happening to Armenian interests in official
Washington, in foreign capitals, and elsewhere. This is where you’ll
find most of the work of our Washington Bureau, led by Emil Sanamyan.
Your elected federal officials, the Armenian lobby, the European
Union, Turkey, Russia, oil and gas, think tanks, railways, and
diplomacy – they’re all here.

* Armenia news. In the middle pages of the front section, you will
find our coverage of how people are living in Armenia and Karabakh:
work, education, health care, family life, civic involvement. You’ll
find news and analysis on Armenia’s relations with foreign governments
and international organizations. This is where you’ll find most of the
work of our Yerevan office. One area of special interest is the state
of the economy, business, and finance, Other areas of interest include
energy, the environment, civil society, and the initiatives of
Armenian-Â – American individuals and entities in Armenia.

* Commentary. Our opinion pages comprise the last part of the front
section. You will find the editorial here, reflecting the publishers’
opinion. In addition, you’ll find a range of other views in
commentaries and letters. We hope you’ll share your views on these
pages and contibute to vigorous and civil debate.

* Community news. The Reporter remains a community newspaper. We are
increasing our community coverage in a few ways. First, we are sending
reporters to more community events to bring you in-depth coverage.
Second, we are asking you to let us know about births, graduations,
weddings, promotions, accomplishments, and, yes, deaths, so we can let
our community know too. Third, we are paying more attention to
California, where so many Armenians have settled. And fourth, we are
publishing a separate community section every week, with its own front
page, to highlight the most important community news.

* Arts & Culture. Many of us still look at movie credits carefully,
scouring them for an Armenian name. But we’re getting used to seeing
more and more of them. We decided we needed a colorful 16-page weekly
section dedicated to books, music, theater, television, dance,
fashion, language, cinema, sculpture – OK, to arts, culture, and
entertainment. Now that we’ve been working on it for a while, we
wonder whether 16 pages is enough.

Maybe we left something out. After you’ve had your surj with the
paper, please drop us a line and let us know what you think. After
all, this space is usually reserved for letters to the editor.

Very truly yours,
Vincent Lima
Editor

************************************* **************************************

15. Editorial: USC Trojans show the way

This week the University of Southern California Institute of Armenian
Studies will honor Ambassador John Marshall Evans for his service, and
above all for a choice he made: the choice to be undiplomatic, the
choice to cut through the muck and double-talk that substitutes for
honest discussion of the Armenian Genocide in the White House and the
State Department.

Putting his career on the line, Mr. Evans gave the administration the
opportunity to make a breakthrough, to take a step forward. Alas, the
administration chose to take two steps back. It could not tolerate Mr.
Evans’ act of truth telling.

We join the USC Institute of Armenian Studies in its salute to a man
of principle.

The institute deserves kudos for showing leadership in the matter,
consistent with its stated mission to be engaged in the life of the
Armenian-American community.

The institute, only two years old, is an excellent next step in
institutional Armenian studies. USC obviously is not the first
university in which a program in Armenian studies has been endowed.
>From Harvard to UCLA, from Fresno State to Clark University in
Worcester, Mass., there are such chairs at prominent instutions across
the country. Nor is the USC institute the first institute engaged in
modern Armenian studies – the Zoryan Institute, the Gomidas Institute,
and the Armenian National Institute are among its predecessors.

The USC Institute of Armenian Studies is different in at least two
important ways, however.

Endowing a university chair is meant to ensure that the university
always has a professor specializing in the subject at hand, training a
new generation of students at the university. Independent institutes,
on the other hand, can work with scholars and others from a wide range
of institutions, and they can pursue an agenda without the potential
constraints of the traditional academic environment. Donors can set
the agenda and expect accountability.

What Professor Richard Hrair Dekmejian has achieved at USC is to set
up a hybrid, bringing together the best of both worlds.

Just as significantly, in setting its agenda, the institute has chosen
a broad, encompassing definition of Armenian studies. It has chosen to
be engaged in present-day issues facing Armenians in the United
States, in Turkey, and in Armenia. Without compromising in its
commitment to academic rigor and truth-finding, the institution
refuses to isolate itself through purely academic pursuits.

The USC Institute of Armenian Studies is an invaluable meeting place
for scholars and the community at large. Let us stand by this young
initiative and help it grow and succeed.

Connect:
armenian@college.usc.edu
http:/ / leadership/armenian.html

************************ ************************************************** *

Please send your news to news@reporter.am and your letters to
letters@reporter.am
(c) 2007 CS Media Enterprises LLC. All Rights Reserved