Friday, February 4, 2022
European Leaders Organize Fresh Talks Between Aliyev, Pashinian
Armenia - French President Emmanuel Macron holds a video conference with
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and
European Council President Charles Michel, February 4, 2022.
French President Emmanuel Macron and European Council President Charles Michel
held a virtual meeting with the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan on Friday.
The video conference came about two months after Prime Minister Nikol
Pashinian’s two face-to-face meetings with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev
which were separately hosted by Macron and Michel in Brussels.
“They took stock of progress achieved since the [December] meetings held in the
sidelines of the Eastern Partnership Summit, in particular recent releases of
detainees, ongoing joint efforts to search for missing persons, as well as the
upcoming restoration of railways tracks,” Macron and Michel said in a joint
statement on the video conference.
“The heads of State and Government agreed that this meeting offered a valuable
opportunity to discuss a wide range of issues,” added the statement.
Pashinian’s office reported that the four leaders discussed efforts to reduce
tensions along the Armenian-Azerbaijani border and open transport links between
the two South Caucasus states as well as international organizations’ access to
Karabakh.
“Prime Minister Pashinian stressed the need for a long-term settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the signing of a peace treaty under the aegis of
the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group,” it said.
Neither statement mentioned any concrete agreements reached by Aliyev and
Pashinian.
The two leaders pledged to de-escalate border tensions and restore
Armenian-Azerbaijani rail links at their December 14 trilateral meeting with
Michel. But they failed to patch up their differences on the status of a highway
that would also connect Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave via Armenia’s
southeastern Syunik province.
Belgium - European Council President Charles Michel meets with Armenian Prime
Minister Nikol Pashinian and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Brussels,
December 14, 2021.
Aliyev said ahead of the Brussels talks that people and cargo passing through
that “Zangezur corridor” must be exempt from Armenian border controls. Pashinian
rejected the demand.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry said late on Thursday that Yerevan has presented
Baku with new proposals regarding “the opening of the roads.” The ministry
spokesman, Vahan Hunanian, did not disclose them.
“We have not received any response from the Azerbaijani side to these proposals
yet,” Hunanian said in written comments. “Armenia is ready to start implementing
these proposals as soon as possible.”
The comments came in response to Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov’s
claims that Yerevan is obstructing the launch of the cross-border transport
links. Hunanian said the claims are “paradoxical” in light of what Pashinian
stated earlier on Thursday.
Pashinian announced further progress towards the planned construction of the
45-kilometer Syunik railway. He said senior Armenian and Russian officials
discussed “practical” details of the project on Wednesday.
Next Turkish-Armenian Talks Set For February 24
• Tatevik Sargsian
Armenia - Armenia's deputy parliament speaker Ruben Rubinian (left) and Turkish
diplomat Serdar Kilic.
Turkish and Armenian envoys will meet in Vienna on February 24 for the second
round of negotiations on normalizing relations between their countries.
The two sides announced the date and venue of the meeting in identical
statements issued late on Thursday. They said nothing about its agenda.
The Turkish daily Sabah reported last month that Ankara would like the talks to
be held in Turkey or Armenia.
The first meeting between Serdar Kilic, a veteran Turkish diplomat, and Ruben
Rubinian, a deputy speaker of the Armenian parliament, took place in Moscow on
January 14. The foreign ministries of the two neighboring nations described the
talks as “positive and constructive.” They said the special envoys agreed to
continue the dialogue “without preconditions.”
Armenia’s Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan on Wednesday voiced cautious optimism
over the success of the process welcomed by Russia, the United States and the
European Union.
Earlier, the Turkish government invited Mirzoyan and Rubinian to an
international conference that will be held in Turkey in March. Prime Minister
Nikol Pashinian signaled last week that Yerevan will likely accept the
invitation.
Ankara has for decades linked the establishment of diplomatic relations with
Yerevan and the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border to a resolution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict acceptable to Azerbaijan. Turkish Foreign Minister
Mevlut Cavusoglu has repeatedly made clear that his government will coordinate
the Turkish-Armenian normalization talks with Baku.
“We will naturally continue to advance the course and all stages of these
meetings through a dialogue with our Azerbaijani brothers,” Cavusoglu’s deputy,
Yavuz Selim Kiran, said on Thursday.
Speaking at an event in Ankara marking the 30th anniversary of the establishment
of Turkish-Azerbaijani diplomatic relations, Kiran noted the resumption this
week of charter flights between Istanbul and Yerevan.
Armenian Opposition Won’t Field Presidential Candidate
• Karlen Aslanian
Armenia - Senor lawmakers from the opposition Hayastan and Pativ Unem alliances
talk during a parliament session in Yerevan, August 24, 2021.
The two opposition forces represented in Armenia’s parliament have decided not
to nominate a candidate for the new president of the republic who will be
elected by lawmakers in the coming weeks.
In a joint statement released on Friday, the Hayastan and Pativ Unem alliances
slammed the presidential candidate fielded by the ruling Civil Contract party
and said they do not want to legitimize his almost certain election.
The candidate, Vahagn Khachatrian, has served as minister of high-tech industry
in Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s cabinet since August. Khachatrian was
officially nominated on Wednesday ten days after former President Armen
Sarkissian unexpectedly stepped down.
Civil Contract controls enough parliament seats to install the 62-year-old
economist as head of states. He will have largely ceremonial powers.
The opposition statement claimed that Khachatrian is a partisan figure who does
not correspond to constitutional provisions requiring the presidency to be a
“really neutral institution consolidating the society.” It said such
consolidation is especially necessary now that Armenia is facing “extremely
serious internal and external challenges.”
“But this regime, which has put the country on the brink of destruction and
split the society, decided to stick to its practices and to be guided by only
parochial, rather than national, interests,” added the statement.
Hayastan and Pativ Unem therefore “will not participate in any way in the
election of the president of the republic,” it said.
Speaking with RFE/RL’s Armenian Service later in the day, Khachatrian said he
regrets the opposition decision. He expressed readiness to meet with opposition
leaders and discuss their concerns.
Asked whether he will try to win the backing of opposition lawmakers ahead of
the vote, Khachatrian said: “I just don’t know ways of doing that.”
New Poll Finds Growing Pessimism In Armenia
Armenia - A view of Yerevan and Mount Ararat, 17 February 2013.
Armenians have grown more pessimistic since last year’s parliamentary elections,
with only one in three of them thinking that their country is on the right track
now, according to a U.S.-funded opinion poll.
The nationwide poll released this week also found that most of them do not
expect major economic benefits from the possible opening of Armenia’s borders
with Turkey and Azerbaijan.
It was commissioned by the Washington-based International Republican Institute
(IRI), financed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and
conducted by an Armenian polling organization in late November and early
December.
According to IRI, 46 percent of 1,512 randomly interviewed people felt that
“Armenia is heading in the wrong direction,” up from 34 percent in the previous
survey conducted last July shortly after the snap elections won by Prime
Minister Nikol Pashinian’s Civil Contract party. The capital Yerevan had the
highest percentage of such respondents.
The proportion of those who anticipate positive change in the country fell from
41 percent to 34 percent in that period. It stood at 62 percent in late 2019.
Civil Contract won the June 2020 polls with about 54 percent of the vote,
according to their official results. Pashinian regularly cites that victory in
response to opposition criticism of his policies and accusations of misrule.
The latest IRI poll suggests that 61 percent of Armenians believe their country
is “governed in the interest of some groups,” rather than the majority of the
population. Just under a fifth of those polled were “very satisfied” with the
work of the prime minister’s office, with another 30 percent only “somewhat
satisfied.”
Of all state institutions, the office of the outgoing human rights ombudsman,
Arman Tatoyan, had the highest approval ratings, followed by the Armenian
police, local governments and the military.
Tatoyan has been increasingly critical of Pashinian’s administration, accusing
it of undermining judicial independence and bullying opposition groups that
defeated the ruling party in recent local elections.
Respondents were also asked about what they see as the key challenges facing
Armenia more than one year after the 2020 war in Nagorno-Karabakh. Their most
frequent answers were “territorial, border issues” (28 percent) and “national
security” (15 percent).
Armenia - An Armenian soldier stands guard on the border with Azerbaijan,
November 12, 2021.
“With the recent Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and a history of military
confrontation in the region, Armenians are understandably concerned about
national security and threats along the [Armenian-Azerbaijani] border,” said
Stephen Nix, director of IRI’s Eurasia Division. “They would like to see a
resolution to these long-standing territorial issues.”
Pashinian, who is blamed by his political opponents for Armenia’s defeat in the
six-week war, has repeatedly promised to usher in an “era of peaceful
development.” He has stressed the importance of having economic links with
Azerbaijan and Turkey, saying that they will significantly benefit the Armenian
economy,
The IRI poll shows most Armenians do not share the prime minister’s view.
According to its findings, only 5-6 percent of them think that the economic
impact of open borders with Azerbaijan and Turkey will be “definitely positive.”
More than two-thirds of respondents described Turkey as “the greatest economic
threat to Armenia.”
Reprinted on ANN/Armenian News with permission from RFE/RL
Copyright (c) 2022 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc.
1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.
Author: Adrine Hakobian
Why French Jews Finally Changed Their View of the Armenian Genocide
Ha'aretz
Feb 6 2022
For decades, France’s Jewish community followed the Israeli line on the Armenian genocide of 1915. Now, Jewish and Armenian historians agree, that approach is itself being consigned to history
by Shirli Sitbon
Paris
PARIS – French presidential candidate Eric Zemmour wants to revoke France’s so-called memorial laws, which recognize genocide and slavery as crimes against humanity, and make Holocaust denial a criminal act.
The controversial far-right candidate is currently facing an appeal trial after saying in a 2019 TV debate that the Vichy regime led by Marshal Philippe Pétain saved French Jews during the Holocaust. For him and others, memorial laws muzzle free speech and historic debate. “Most French historians have opposed those memorial laws that block historic research,” Zemmour told the CNews French news station last September.
The 1990 Gayssot law, making it a criminal offense to question the actions of Nazi Germany, made it easier to limit revisionist theories. However, France’s memorial laws don’t protect all victims to the same extent. For instance, while they recognise the 1915 Armenian genocide, they don’t criminalize revisionism of the facts.
In other European countries such as Switzerland, Greece, Cyprus and Slovakia, it is illegal to deny the Armenian genocide. But when French lawmakers voted in 2011 on whether to criminalize the denial of all genocides that are recognized by French law, it was struck down by the constitutional court, which said it violated free speech.
Many Armenians were shocked at the time to hear respected Jewish public figures oppose the bill. As the court was due to rule, for instance, former Justice Minister Robert Badinter wrote in the French daily Le Monde that banning revisionism would be unconstitutional.
French Armenians demonstrating in Paris, on the 100th anniversary of the
Armenian genocide. Credit: Remy de la Mauviniere / AP
A protest in Paris calling for the Armenian genocide not to be recognized by the state.
New phenomenon
“Can the French parliament turn itself into a court of world history?” wrote Badinter, a respected Jewish lawmaker. He argued that banning Holocaust denial had a legal basis because the Nuremberg Trials convicted Nazi leaders after the war, but no international trial had been organized after the 1915 Armenian genocide. Instead, the Ottoman authorities held courts-martial for some of the perpetrators.
Many Armenians believed this line of reasoning to be fundamentally wrong. “The notion of genocide did not even exist at the beginning of the 20th century,” notes French-Armenian historian Raymond Kévorkian.
How Turkey's genocide denial, boosted by shameful academics, threatens Armenian lives today
Recognizing the trauma of the Armenian genocide doesn’t diminish the Holocaust
The Jews who befriended Turkey and became genocide deniers
And for Ara Toranian, who co-chairs the Coordinating Council of Armenian Organizations of France umbrella group, such legal arguments were pretexts to avoid new tensions with Turkey.
An estimated 1.5 million people were killed in the events that are widely viewed by scholars as the first genocide of the 20th century. Turkey denies the deaths constituted genocide, saying the toll has been inflated and that those killed were victims of civil war and unrest. Ankara contends that some 300,000 Armenians were killed.
The historical role of French Jews in failing to support Armenian efforts to get the genocide recognized rankled for many decades. In recent times, though, their fight has been more widely acknowledged in the Jewish community.
Get breaking news and analyses delivered to your inbox
A protest in Paris calling for the Armenian genocide not to be recognized by the state.
It was, despite their protests, but it's still not illegal to deny it. Credit: AP
Eric Zemmour arriving in Yerevan, Armenia, with his adviser Sarah Knafo
France’s chief rabbi, Haïm Korsia, for instance, is unequivocal in his belief that the laws governing Holocaust denial should also cover the events of 1915-1917.
“The Armenian genocide is an unquestionable reality, there is no denying it,” he says. “The genocide had been planned in advance and carried out. There is [also] continuity between the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust – Hitler said, ‘Who remembers the Armenians?’” when he discussed the Final Solution.
“If people want to deny a reality, they must be put in place, be corrected,” Korsia adds. “Laws are important, but educating children about the Holocaust and about the Armenian genocide is even more crucial.”
Armenians had long hoped Diaspora Jews would lend such support to enshrine the memory of the Armenian victims, but over the years faced a major obstacle: the Jewish state itself.
“Israel’s position on the Armenian genocide is very significant, considering the historic dimension,” Kévorkian says. “Our two nations have suffered genocides and it’s difficult to accept this cynical posture. The reasoning behind this is regional: Israel has had a decades-long military and intelligence alliance with Turkey. They have been strategic allies – especially when Israel had few official contacts with its Arab neighbors.
“But the situation is improving. [Israeli] historians and left-wing politicians have pushed for recognition. I think Israel will eventually recognize the genocide like other countries have.”
‘All genocides are unique’
Toranian cites her disappointment that not only has Israel failed to recognize the Armenian genocide, “it also backed Turkey’s position abroad. In the U.S., the Anti-Defamation League, for example, pushed back against the official recognition of the genocide.” Although he notes that the ADL has since reversed its position, for years “those organizations played by the revisionist guide book and made the situation extremely tense.”
In France, some prominent Jewish figures adopted a similar approach. Armenian historians and public figures say they don’t want to accuse anyone specifically, either because of their advanced age or because some have passed away.
“It’s part of the past,” is how Kévorkian describes it. “Some Jewish figures used to insist on the singular and specific nature of the Holocaust – it was almost contemptuous,” he says. “Even historian researchers can be politicized sometimes. But I believe we are past that now.
“You have to understand that the French authorities took so much time to acknowledge their responsibility in the Holocaust that this generated bitterness. Some Jews were absorbed by their personal story and didn’t care as much about what others had suffered,” he says. (France only began to acknowledge its wartime role in 1995, when then-President Jacques Chirac broke a 50-year taboo and said his country owed French Holocaust victims “an everlasting debt” for its actions helping the Nazis.)
Kévorkian says that, today, he would “rather think of those who helped us – like the Klarsfeld family. They pushed doors open and did everything they could to have the Armenian genocide recognized,” referring to lawyers and historians Serge and Beate Klarsfeld and their son Arno. “These are the people who initiated the creation of the Jewish Contemporary Documentation Center, collecting documents about the Holocaust, and then they helped Armenian historians do the same. CRIF has voiced support too,” he says, referring to the umbrella body of French Jewish organizations.
Toranian says that in the past, some French Jewish public figures “saw the Holocaust as a genocide apart; they said it was unique. They are right. But then again, all genocides have specific and unique characteristics.”
Kévorkian also notes the work of the Shoah Memorial Holocaust museum in Paris, “which has also voiced support and done much more. It organizes training for teachers: this is key to educating children about violence, exacerbated nationalism and what it can generate. They learn in high school about the three major genocides of the 20th century [Rwanda being the third]. Sometimes, there are problems during these classes when some children of Turkish origin protest – a bit like some students criticize lessons about the Holocaust,” he says.
French Jewish historian Marc Knobel says we should look forward, not back, when it comes to French Jews’ attitudes toward the Armenian genocide.
“I think that digging 15, 20, 30 or 35 years back will not bring anything positive; we should not create frictions,” he says. “If there had been a different position regarding the genocide decades ago – and I’m not saying that was the case – then I think it would have been linked to the Israeli position, the Israeli alliance with Turkey. Perhaps some institutions that were connected to Israel did not want to push this issue forward and come in the way of Israeli interests.”
Knobel also believes Israel should now recognize the Armenian genocide (“Failing to recognize it is deeply wrong”), but says there is “no ambiguity” among Jewish historians. “Jewish and non-Jewish historians agree quasi-unanimously about the Armenian genocide. No Jewish figure protested when the French parliament recognized the Armenian genocide. Jews have always expressed solidarity with the Armenians and their fight against genocide denial,” he adds.
Eric Zemmour arriving in Yerevan, Armenia, with his adviser Sarah Knafo
last December. Credit: KAREN MINASYAN – AFP
New phenomenon
On the streets of France, meanwhile, the Armenian genocide still fuels hatred and violence. Descendants of Armenian genocide survivors who found refuge in France, for instance, have faced new threats in recent years. In 2020, a group of pro-Turkish nationalists calling themselves the “Grey Wolves” threatened them. And while the organization has since been disbanded, the threat remains real.
“It’s a new phenomenon. These groups of people marched in several cities, searching for Armenians – it’s alarming,” Toranian recounts. “The level of violence escalated during the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh,” he adds, referring to the war that flared between Armenia and Turkish-backed Azerbaijan in the autumn of 2020.
Zemmour has been accused of mining such tensions for political gain. He visited Armenia in December, and says the country shows what could happen to France if it does not stop immigration from Muslim countries.
“Zemmour tried to use the situation in Armenia to stigmatize and criticize French Muslims,” Kévorkian says. “Some of us have criticized this strategy. The Armenian genocide is not a question of religion,” he adds.
Chief Rabbi Korsia agrees. “There will always be people who deny genocides, but what does that show us about society?” he asks. “It’s a place where people oppose others instead of building together a common reality full of promises. There is no reason to distinguish between the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide,” he sums up.
Armenia ex-President about PM: This man has poor understanding of negotiation process
News.am
Armenia – Jan 31 2022
22:53, 31.01.2022
Exactly what you said proves the fact that this man has a poor understanding of the negotiation process and does not know the details of the negotiation process nor the essence, said Armenia's third President Serzh Sargsyan in an exclusive interview.
He referred to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's statements that the issue of Nagorno Karabakh was delegated to the UN Security Council after the April War, while recalling the UNSC resolutions of 1993, and also speaking about the possibility of the UNSC to adopt or not to adopt a document.
"First, what do the UNSC resolutions of 1993 have to do with this? Those were about a completely different issue. All those resolutions adopted in 1993 were calling for cessation of armed hostilities. Those were meant to decide neither on the status, nor anything else for that matter. And the claim that the [new] UN Security Council resolution would not be adopted raises a question: exactly what line of argumentation does he rely on to yield such a conclusion ?" said Serzh Sargsyan.
"I am saying that the [new] UN Security Council resolution would no doubt be adopted, based on the fact three out of five Permanent Members of the Security Council – United States, Russia and France – were those proposing the draft. Can you at all imagine a situation when, if I must repeat myself, three out of five Permanent Members (United States, Russia and France) table a draft resolution, and even if [it were not adopted] – what would happen? Even if they decided to go to extreme measure and one of the Permanent Members used the veto power, what would we lose? The co-chairs simply could not make certain proposals and then in the course of their discussions turn 180 degrees and suddenly adopt a different decision? That’s impossible," Sargsyan said.
In response to the remark that if such a thing had happened, the responsibility for the non-resolution would have fallen on the international community, the third president of Armenia said that not even the international community but a particular member of it would have become responsible. "This [document] was not ‘a catastrophe’. For us that was, of course, not the document of our dreams, neither the Kazan document was the embodiment of our dreams, but it was an acceptable document for us. It was an implementable one on the ground too. That is obvious," Serzh Sargsyan said.
Is Armenia’s civil society sick or dead?
panorama.am
Armenia – Jan 27 2022
Civil society plays an important role in building a democratic society, and it needs to raise issues related to different spheres and try to get them solved, if, naturally, the authorities have a desire to see the problems solved.
The incumbent authorities in Armenia, particularly Nikol Pashinyan, claim that the government is committed to democratic values and that democracy is not an alien concept to them. However, nowadays civil society is not that active, its voice does not reach the authorities, because, according to the representatives of civil society, the problems and complaints voiced by them do not get any response from the current authorities.
Speaking to Panorama.am, Chairman of the Yerevan Press Club Boris Navasardyan outlined several reasons for the passivity of civil society.
"The first is inertia, which was formed during the revolution and immediately after it. Some representatives of civil society believed that this government already represented the interests of society, so there was no need to further pressure the authorities into making reforms. Since it has lasted for a while, inertia has already been formed," he said.
At the same time, he noted when they began to notice that the steps taken by the authorities failed to meet their expectations, it was already difficult to “get back into shape” that they had before the revolution.
According to Boris Navasardyan, the second reason is that the political interests of some civil society representatives came to coincide with the political interests of those who were in power structures and the well-known formula GONGO, government-organized non-governmental organizations, emerged.
"We had such organizations before the revolution, but their composition changed after it. That is, the civil society organizations that were not GONGOs before the revolution, in fact, adopted this workstyle after the revolution," he noted
According to him, the third reason is that, unlike the previous Armenian governments, the new government, strange as it may seem, was not open to a dialogue with civil society and refused to accept its important role,
"It was conditioned not by the fact that the previous authorities respected civil society, but by the fact that a certain dialogue with civil society was a precondition for good relations between the authorities and international organizations. Now, we see that this circumstance is not so important for the government, as they care little about what international structures want to see in Armenia. It may be due to the fact that our authorities exaggerate that there is a perception of Armenia among the international community as a country which has made a big step towards democracy," Navasardyan explained.
He stressed that this perception is changing for the worse, but the authorities are not yet aware of the importance of what is happening, and therefore they disregard the criticism voiced by NGOs.
"When you face such an attitude, you somehow lose heart and realize that no matter how active you are, there will be no result. Hence, there is certain apathy in the Armenian civil society," said the Yerevan Press Club head.
In Navasardyan’s words, all these developments, as well as the revolution, Covid-19 and war, resulted in reduced opportunities and willingness of civil society to work and cooperate with each other during this period, while separate organizations or a small group of organizations can hardly solve problems on their own.
He believes consolidation is necessary to increase the activity of civil society. "At least those civil society representatives, who in general think alike, do not necessarily strive for good relations with the authorities and are ready to enter into a conflict if necessary, should be united,” he said. “But such a conflict must also have a reason; it must be understood that by going into conflict, it is possible to have an impact. The authorities must feel that there is a consolidated force on this side, an institution which can influence and restrain public opinion. If it succeeds, the solidarity that existed a few years ago will be restored and, maybe, there will be results, but today Armenia’s civil society is increasingly split.”
Boris Navasardyan also noted that when NGOs working in various spheres of public interest protection have no levers of influence, it naturally affects those spheres. He found it difficult to name a specific area in which reforms and progress have been observed.
President of the Association for Sustainable Human Development Karine Danielyan found it difficult to answer the question of why civil society is passive today. According to her, this issue needs a special study.
"I don't feel that passivity. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's generally accepted that there must be a serious phenomenon in society for it to become active and get engaged," she said, stressing there are problems which require solutions, but there is no such phenomenon which would simultaneously affect many people and pose a threat to their lives.
Danielyan states people are tired of taking to the streets all the time to voice some kind of issues.
She also attributes the decreased activity of civil society to the fact that some of the formerly active members may now hold government posts.
"It has always been the case that when such people come to power, they rule out a wave of protests, but then life dictates its own rules – to swell the ranks with new people and become active,” Danielyan said.
Zhanna Aleksanyan, head of the Journalists for Human Rights NGO, does not share the view that civil society is inactive.
"The work of civil society is more visible now, especially over the past two years. Maybe at the beginning of the revolution I would agree with you; we believed that there would be reforms, the authorities would fulfill their promises, however, we saw that it all did not happen,” she stated.
In Aleksanyan’s words, if there was an opposition that would really raise the issues the society is most concerned about, it could be said that civil society is not that active. It is against this background, she claims, that civil society's statements and dissenting opinions about various phenomena are more visible.
She found it difficult to say why civil society representatives do not resort to street protest, as they did before.
"Perhaps the reason was the trust in this government. Now the post-war situation may prevent such actions, but I'm sure there will be protests if it continues like this,” Aleksanyan said.
According to her, now it is very difficult to achieve something. Maybe people and civil society trusted the authorities to some extent, but now they see that there is no change in any sphere.
"Nearly two years ago, civil society was pretty lost, and now it's being overlooked," she said.
Zhanna Aleksanyan said that only once did Nikol Pashinyan meet with representatives of civil society before the parliamentary elections, adding it was useless. According to her, perhaps it was the authorities who needed such a meeting before the elections.
"This is a disturbing and regrettable situation. After the war, so many families who lost their sons live next to us. Under these conditions, too, one does not feel the role of the state, nor do these families feel it," Aleksanyan said.
She stressed that she is not at all enthusiastic about the policy of the authorities, their statements, their failure to admit their mistakes and to accept the results of public debates, as well as their inability to draw conclusions. According to the human rights defender, after the war there were spheres where something had to be done, the NGOs themselves expressed readiness to cooperate with the authorities and help, but there was no reaction.
"The part of civil society that is active is having a hard time now, although it makes a small part. There is a certain feeling of powerlessness to change something, as before," said Aleksanyan.
Human rights activist Avetik Ishkhanyan is surprised by the silence of his former colleagues over various issues, as well as the severance of relationship with him.
"I can make some assumptions. One of them is that, in fact, they were not the bearers of these values, but simply chose a profession, because different areas of civil society – protection of human rights, freedom of speech, ecology – were a mission, not a profession. In my opinion, all of these were not values for them, but a profession. A profession is not a bad thing, but it is only a means of making a living," he stressed.
According to the human rights activist, not only civil society, but also international organizations remain silent concerning all developments in Armenia. "So the more likely version is that it is politics, they are the carriers of this policy. Part of this policy was also the handover of Artsakh to Azerbaijan,” he said.
Ishkhanyan claims civil society can “activate the order”. "When the very international organizations that have made a name for themselves as democratic start criticizing, they, too, will follow suit,” he noted.
Artsakh factions of National Assembly draft bill on Artsakh occupied territories
News.am
Armenia – Jan 30 2022
18:25, 30.01.2022
The leaders of the five parliamentary factions of Artsakh jointly worked on a draft law "On the Occupied Territories of Artsakh" and on February 2 will present it for the first reading, Metakse Hakobyan, a member of the Justice faction of the Artsakh National Assembly, told NEWS.am.
"The main idea of the project is that no international organization or company has the right to take any action in the occupied territories of our homeland without the agreement of the Armenian side, and in case of any problems in the future these companies will not have the right to demand compensation or reimbursement from us if they have not coordinated their actions with us beforehand. The second point is that our enemy-occupied territories are not only the territories occupied in 2020. This is also the Shahumian region, which was left under Azerbaijani control after the first Artsakh war, as well as the villages of Martuni and Martakert. This is the essence of the draft, which will be put to a vote in the first reading at the February 2 plenary session and will be adopted in the second reading," she said.
According to the deputy, 30 years ago the people of Artsakh self-determined and proclaimed itself a free and independent state, which is international law.
"Regardless of whether other states have recognized it or not, this is an international right and Artsakh self-determined 30 years ago, and no one can take that right away from the people of Artsakh and Armenians as a whole. This project is fully legal, it is important because now we agree to return not just pieces of land but our entire homeland, we are ready to fight for it," she said.
The deputy said that the territories occupied by Azerbaijan include Kashatagh region, Shahumyan region, Martuni, Martakert, Hadrut, Shushi, Askeran and Getashen.
Armenia deputy PM Grigoryan: There is mutual understanding related to railway
News.am
Armenia – Jan 28 2022
12:24, 28.01.2022
At the moment, there is a mutual understanding at the highest level regarding the railway, and this is confirmed by the statements. Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan told this to reporters at Yerablur Military Pantheon in Yerevan Friday—on Army Day anniversary—, referring to the matter of unblocking roads in the region.
"I believe this is a very positive progress. At the moment, expert work is being done more. I will additionally inform about our future meetings as a result of that work," added the deputy PM.
According to Grigoryan, the aforesaid railway is already a constructive work because at this stage, the working group is carrying out work that is very specific and pursues a specific goal.
"It is the construction of a railway in the parts that of the Republic of Armenia," the deputy premier explained.
Armenia made marked progress in its democratic development, PACE report says
11:40,
YEREVAN, JANUARY 27, ARMENPRESS. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) will debate a draft resolution on the functioning of democratic institutions in Armenia on January 27.
The authors of the resolution are MP representing Finland Kimmo Kiljunen and MP representing Sweden Boriana Åberg.
The lawmakers have also presented a report adjacent to the draft resolution, stating that “the Monitoring Committee welcomes the fact that Armenia has made marked progress in its democratic development since the change of political leadership in 2018 and has successfully emerged from the serious political crisis triggered by the outcome in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which was overcome by parliamentary elections in June 2021”.
“The committee assesses the achievements made, and challenges remaining, with regard to, inter alia, electoral reform, the balance of institutional power, the political environment, judicial reform and the media environment, and makes a number of concrete recommendations”, the report says.
The Assembly also welcomes the pursuit of reforms, the launch of new projects since the change of political leadership in 2018 and the degree to which Armenia has co-operated with the Council of Europe, including at the level of its parliamentary delegation, the report added.
The Assembly calls on the Armenian authorities to complete the reform of the electoral framework by taking on board the recommendations of the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR, in particular as regards providing a precise legal definition of campaign expenditure, abolishing the ban on bi-nationals standing for election, enabling voters to challenge voting results in their constituency.
The report also made a reference to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict where PACE calls on to achieve the fair and stable settlement of the conflict within the OSCE Minsk Group. PACE also calls on to return all Armenian prisoners of war.
The NATO is not ready to stand back from the fundamental principles of the alliance. Secretary General
21:03,
YEREVAN, 25 JANUARY, ARMENPRESS. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced that the NATO is not ready to go for compromises on the basic principles of the alliance with Russia, ARMENPRESS reports, “RIA NOVOSTI” writes citing TB television centre.
As Russia-NATO military-political tensions over Ukraine escalate, Russia and the United States are holding talks at the levels of presidents, foreign ministers and lower levels to avoid further escalation. The main concern of Washington: the alleged threat of Russian troops invading Ukraine, Moscow's concern is NATO expansion to the East, including Ukraine's possible membership to the North Atlantic Alliance.
Candidate for ombudsperson: There are no political prisoners in Armenia
panorama.am
Armenia – Jan 24 2022
There are no political prisoners in Armenia, a candidate for human rights defender, Kristine Grigoryan, said in the parliament on Monday, citing a PACE report.
Her comments came in response to a question of MP Anna Grigoryan, who represents the opposition Hayastan faction.
The candidate cited a report of the PACE Monitoring Committee, which has concluded that there are no political prisoners in the country.
“I agree with this statement,” she said.
In response, the opposition lawmaker recalled the criminal proceedings against the opposition heads of a number of Armenian communities, including against Goris community head Arush Arushanyan, who remains in custody. She provided details of the case and said that both Arushanyan and other arrested community leaders are political prisoners.
The candidate for ombudsperson argued that there are specific criteria determining whether a citizen is a political prisoner or not.
Separately, Grigoryan said she is ready to work both with the authorities and the opposition to address border security issues.
Noting that the delimitation and demarcation of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border is a complex process, she stressed it must ensure the protection of human rights.
"I will collaborate both with the ruling force and the opposition, as well as with the state and local self-government bodies to resolve the issues raised. I disagree with the idea that the ombudsperson’s only tool of influence is statements," she added.
Armen Sarkissian tacitly supported all initiatives of the current authorities – lawmaker
panorama.am
Armenia – Jan 24 2022
"President Armen Sarkissian has always tacitly supported all initiatives brought by the current leaders of Armenia," opposition lawmaker from 'Armenia' bloc Aram Vardevanyan told reporters when asked to comment on the resignation of the president.
In the words of Vardevanyan, the past four years in the post of the president, Sarkisian has been mostly complaining about his limited capacities, while has in fact failed to realise them in full.
"I raise this with regret as the institute of the President could have seriously matured in the past period," stressed the opposition MP. As an example, he pointed to the capacities of the Human Rights Defender.
"You may compare the passive posture of the presidential institute with the efficiency of the Institute of the Human Rights Defender, when the latter has less capacities by the law," added Vardevanyan, suggesting the reason behind Sarkissian's resignation could be either some inter-political or external geopolitical processes and challenges.