Author: Andres-Papazian

RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER’S REMARKS AT NEWS CONFERENCE WITH ARMENIAN COUNTERPART

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
April 9 2015

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media
questions at a joint news conference following talks with Foreign
Minister of the Republic of Armenia Edvard Nalbandyan, Moscow, April
8, 2015

Ladies and gentlemen,

I’ve held talks with Armenia’s Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandyan.

Armenia is our reliable partner and ally. We value our relations that
go back centuries and are steeped in the historical, cultural and
spiritual affinity of our two nations. These relations have been
evolving steadily and have now reached a new level with Armenia
joining the Eurasian Economic Union.

We have reviewed compliance with the agreements signed during the
contacts between our respective presidents, starting with the state
visit by President Putin to Armenia in December 2013, which was
followed by a series of summits held in 2014. More summits will be
held this year. We agreed to continue to improve the legal framework.

New important agreements are in the works.

We noted the efforts to promote our economic and defence cooperation.

Relevant intergovernmental commissions are fully operational. Today,
we reaffirmed the importance of stepping up their activities.

We have fairly good trade, which exceeded 1.4 billion dollars in 2014.

The cumulative amount of Russian investments in the Armenian economy
stands at about 4 billion dollars and growing.

Our cooperation in the fuel and energy, telecommunications and banking
sectors is expanding. Plans are in place to provide financial
assistance to our Armenian friends in the project to extend the life
of the existing Armenian Nuclear Power Station power unit.

We maintain a good inter-parliamentary dialogue. Today, we discussed a
number of issues that will be more effectively addressed as part of
our inter-parliamentary relations. The leaders of our parliaments
regularly exchange visits. There’s a commission on cooperation between
the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and the National
Assembly of the Republic of Armenia, which will meet again in Yakutsk
in June.

Cultural cooperation, including cultural and educational exchanges, is
a hallmark of our relations. We have supported a new initiative in
this area. Yerevan hosted the first Russian-Armenian Youth Forum in
February. We hope that it will become a tradition, as have
interregional forums, of which three have been already held, and the
fourth one is coming. The legal groundwork to open a Yerevan branch of
Moscow State University has been put in place.

In the sphere of foreign contacts, we have signed a plan of
consultations which serves as a solid foundation for cooperation
between our two foreign ministries. In addition to bilateral contacts,
candid exchanges of views and coordination of our positions, we work
together with other partners within the CIS and the CSTO. We agreed to
consolidate our joint foreign policy actions in the United Nations,
the OSCE, the Council of Europe, the Organization of the Black Sea
Economic Cooperation and, of course, the Commonwealth of Independent
States.

We maintain high levels of cooperation in implementing practical
projects in Armenia that are part of international organizations, such
as UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) and UNDP
(United Nations Development Programme). Russia provides financial
assistance to Armenia to implement specific projects in the textile
industry and rural development.

We exchanged views on the situation in the Trans-Caucasian region,
including issues related to the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement. Acting
bilaterally in its relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan,
respectively, and as co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, Russia will
continue to facilitate the resolution of this problem on a mutually
acceptable basis.

In general, our talks have confirmed that Russia and Armenia enjoy
good relations based on alliance and strategic partnership. I’m
confident that our talks were an important building block on our way
to implementing the policies outlined by the presidents of our
respective nations.

Question: As is known, Azerbaijan has been lately making strong claims
to Armenia’s territory, above and beyond Nagorno-Karabakh, which have
been expressed in official statements and armed provocations. Is
Russia ready to fulfil its military obligations to Armenia should the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict escalate? What will Moscow do if tensions
increase?

Sergey Lavrov: There’s no need for any explanations. All obligations
that have been assumed by the members of the Collective Security
Treaty Organization on a reciprocal basis, are enshrined in this
treaty. All instances where such obligations become actionable are
listed there. Therefore, there’s no need for me to comment on
anything, except just one thing.

We do not even consider the possibility of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict ever entering a “hot” phase. I’m convinced that despite the
rhetoric, none of the parties involved want this to happen, either.

All Russia’s actions in the process to resolve Nagorno-Karabakh, which
my colleague and friend Edward Nalbandyan has kindly mentioned, are
designed to find mutually acceptable solutions within the shortest
possible time.

We maintain regular contacts. The representatives of the co-chair
countries of the OSCE Minsk Group on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
often travel to that region, visit the capitals of Armenia and
Azerbaijan and the contact lines. The presidents of the co-chair
nations personally monitor efforts to find a solution.

In 2014, President Putin made some special efforts, following which we
have continued consultations on possible practical steps that would
allow us to start overcoming this, in my opinion, wholly unnecessary
conflict and to make the Trans-Caucasus region an area of cooperation
that is free from any blockades, sanctions or restrictions. Everyone
stands to benefit, including our Armenian friends.

Question: Greece’s Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras is in Moscow on an
official visit. As is known, he is critical of the EU sanctions on
Russia. Does Russia believe that Greece’s position on this issue may
change the way the EU approaches these sanctions?

Sergey Lavrov: First off, we are entirely convinced that in our
relations with Europe we must collectively (meaning other EAEU members
as well) seek to overcome the same old systemic problem, which is the
“with us or against us” approach. This mentality in the Brussels
bureaucracy shows no sign of changing. This is unfortunate, because
even German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois
Hollande and others have repeatedly spoken in support of responding to
the long-standing initiative by President Putin to start a dialogue on
ways to form a single economic and cultural space from the Atlantic to
the Pacific. I’m confident that once the dialogue begins the needed
solutions will be found and regional powers will be not be forced to
make a false choice. Creating such a space is in the interests of
Russia and the EU. In today’s highly competitive world, only joint
efforts in Europe and Eurasia, especially in the economy, can best
secure the interests of our countries. As you may be aware, back in
January 2014 President Putin proposed opening a specific dialogue on
establishing a free trade area between the EU and the then Customs
Union, which is now the EAEU. This proposal is still on the table.

During the meeting of the leaders of the Normandy four in Minsk on
February 12, the declaration adopted in support of the document signed
by the Contact Group members, which contained the package of measures
to resolve the Ukraine crisis, confirmed that the leaders of France,
Germany, Russia and Ukraine supported the idea of promoting
integration processes in Europe and Eurasia, including contacts
between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union.

Unfortunately, Brussels hasn’t responded constructively to our
proposal to start working on the practical implementation of the
purported goals so far. Hence, the questions like the one posed by our
colleague from Bloomberg. The question is formulated as either/or: the
Greek prime minister, who opposes the sanctions, is coming to visit –
will that help change the EU approach?

I watched Euronews today which aired the announcement of Prime
Minister Alexis Tsipras’s visit to Moscow. The Euronews correspondent
had the following to say about this visit: “Everyone expects that the
visit will help to answer questions such as how can Alexis Tsipras and
Vladimir Putin help each other and whether Vladimir Putin will succeed
in causing a rift in the European Union.” Clearly, the presentation is
already a problem. It’s not about an individual reporter or a TV
channel. It’s all about the way of thinking that is promoted in
Europe. If anyone in Europe starts acting based of their national
interests, it is taken as a violation of the principle of solidarity.

As if the principle of solidarity was developed solely for supporting
the Russophobic minority in the European Union.

When it comes to choosing economic and political priorities and
partners in the regional and international arena, we want every EU
country to be guided by their own fundamental national interests,
rather than far-fetched principles that can hardly even be referred to
as “principles.” They look more like a pretext to keep everyone
together in some kind of an anti-Russian harness.

Regarding the sanctions, an increasing number of EU countries consider
the restrictions to be a counterproductive decision and move by the
EU. This means only one thing: they are beginning to act according to
their national interests, rather than the premises that someone is
trying to impose on them and that run counter to those interests. I
hope that all of the EU countries without exception will act like
that. Someone’s national interests may call for tougher sanctions, I
have no way of knowing that. Each country must have its own
understanding in this regard. However, if you think that taking
coercive actions serves your best interests, and someone else thinks
it doesn’t, then everyone should be able to stick to their respective
beliefs and not force everyone to follow some scheme that was imposed
on them.

Question: Over the past few weeks, the media started reporting
statements by your Western colleagues, such as US Secretary of State
John Kerry and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, in
which they do not rule out the possibility of talking with Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad. Might this signify a change of tone in the
West regarding this issue? Will that speed up the convening of the
Geneva-3 talks, as called for by the Syrian opposition members who met
in Moscow? Are you going to meet with them today?

Sergey Lavrov: Of course, this signifies a change of tone, because we
are hearing things that haven’t been said before. Better late than
never. The bloodshed in Syria and human suffering – by the way,
Christians are suffering in Syria – has lasted for over four years. We
talked about this as well today, building on the initiative that
Russia, Armenia, Lebanon and the Vatican have put forward in the UN
Council on Human Rights by adopting a statement in early March. Sadly,
early on during the crisis, our Western partners have again chosen the
wrong path of settling accounts with this leader, whom they had
“appointed” a dictator. Once they started down that path, they began
to indiscriminately choose their allies from among extremists and
terrorists, with whom they, in fact, interacted. Our Western partners
refused to condemn the terrorists in the UN Security Council, even
though the former tried to undermine the foundations of Bashar
al-Asad’s government. They refused to do so despite our numerous
proposals and the long-held UN Security Council principle that
terrorism cannot be justified under any circumstance. We were told
that these terrorists are bad guys, but they resort to such actions
because they are dissatisfied with the dictatorship. In fact,
Washington was justifying terrorism, which is unacceptable and
outrageous. They hoped that everything would end quickly, and the
regime would fall. They tried to convince everyone that the regime was
“rotten” and had no support in Syrian society. All of that was not
true. The Syrian government still enjoys the support of a significant
number of Syrians: from 50 to 60 per cent, according to various
estimates. That’s a lot. Syrians believe that this regime is a
guarantee that their country will not become a second Libya and will
not fall to pieces, which will then be put together by those who broke
it. No one knows how it will end, though. We welcome the fact that
common sense is prevailing and that more and more opposition groups
agree on the need to find a political platform to overcome the crisis.

As you mentioned, the second meeting of the Syrian opposition is being
held in Moscow these days, and it will be joined later by the Syrian
government’s delegation. After the first meeting held in January, its
moderator – Academician Vitaliy Naumkin, head of the Institute of
Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences – formulated
principles that the parties did not reject, but rather supported in
general. We hope that further understanding can be achieved if we
stick to these principles. Our goal is not to replace the effort to
start official negotiations, but to prepare the conditions for making
such talks productive and representative. The Geneva communique of
June 30, 2012, which everyone agrees serves as the basis for the
settlement, requires that the dialogue involves the entire Syrian
society. Previous attempts to start such a dialogue have failed,
because our Western partners and certain countries in that region
tried to appoint just one opposition group of Syrian emigrants as the
one and only group to represent almost all of the Syrian people.

They have now de facto recognised the prejudicial nature of such an
approach. Along with our Egyptian colleagues, we are making efforts to
consolidate the Syrian opposition around a platform of dialogue in
accordance with the Geneva communique. This dialogue must produce
results on the basis of the mutual consent of all the opposition
groups and government representatives. Let’s see how the current round
of Moscow consultations ends.

From: A. Papazian

NO ALTERNATIVE TO TALKS IN SETTLING NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT – ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER

ITAR-TASS, Russia
April 8, 2015 Wednesday 12:02 PM GMT+4

MOSCOW April 8.

There is no alternative to negotiations in settling the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan
said on Wednesday after talks with his Russian counterpart Sergey
Lavrov

“Up to this day, Azerbaijan has been refusing the proposals of
co-chairs of the Minsk group both on settling the conflict in
Nagorno-Karabakh and on strengthening trust-building measures,”
Nalbandyan noted.

“However, there is no alternative to talks,” the foreign minister
stressed.

Lavrov also confirmed that he is confident the conflict will be settled
by peaceful means. “We do not even allow ourselves to think that the
conflict may enter its hot phase,” Lavrov said. “I am convinced that,
despite the rhetoric, no one from the interested parties wants this,”
he added.

“All actions are directed at finding a mutually acceptable solution
as soon as possible,” the foreign minister stressed.

The mountainous area of Nagorno-Karabakh remains a so-called “frozen
conflict” on the post-Soviet space as it is the subject of a dispute
between Azerbaijan where the region is located and its ethnic Armenian
population.

In 1988 a war broke out there between Azerbaijani troops and Armenian
residents, which resulted in the region’s de facto independence. In
1994 a ceasefire was reached but the relations between the two states
are still strained.

Russia, France and the US co-chair the Minsk Group of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which attempts to broker an
end to hostilities and the conflict. –0 –sap

From: A. Papazian

LA CAMARA DE DIPUTADOS ARGENTINA APOYA EL CENTENARIO DEL GENOCIDIO ARMENIO

9.4.15

Distintos representantes de la comunidad armenia expresaron hoy su
agradecimiento, luego de que la Camara de Diputados de Argentina,
por iniciativa del bloque del Frente para la Victoria a traves
de la diputada Juliana Di Tullio, aprobara una declaracion en
la que transmite “su solidaridad con el pueblo y la colectividad
armenio-argentina al conmemorarse el proximo 24 de abril el 100°
aniversario del genocidio”. La resolucion 1532-d-2015 se da “en
consonancia con los presupuestos de la Ley 26.199 del ‘Día de Accion
por la Tolerancia y el Respeto entre los Pueblos'” y fue firmada
tambien por los diputadosRoberto Pradines, Mario Negri, Federico
Pinedo, Juan Carlos Zabalza, Alicia Comelli, Gustavo Fernandez,
Francisco Plaini, Carlos Heller, Cristian Oliva, Carlos Brown, Ramona
Pucheta, Margarita Stolbizer, Graciela Villata, Óscar Martínez,
Fernando Sanchez y Graciela Boyadjian.

“Vivo en una parte de mi alma la tristeza de varias generaciones de
armenios que sufrieron el genocidio y la diaspora. Eso se transmite
desde hace casi cien años de nuestros abuelos a nuestros padres,
de nosotros a nuestros hijos”, manifesto la diputada nacional por la
Provincia de Tierra del Fuego, Graciela Boyadjian.

“Esta declaracion ratifica la posicion historica de Argentina. Se
trata de una continuacion de la política de apoyo a la lucha por el
reconocimiento y reparacion del genocidio contra el pueblo armenio
perpetrado por el Estado turco hace cien años”, indico Alfonso
Tabakian, director del Consejo Nacional Armenio de Sudamerica.

Por su parte, Jorge Dolmadjian, representante de la Asociacion
Cultural Armenia y miembro de la Comision Conmemorativa del Centenario
del Genocidio Armenio en Argentina, subrayo la importancia de la
declaracion aprobada por unanimidad, quelogro “superar las presiones
del lobby negacionista que intenta torcer el rumbo de la política
de defensa de los derechos humanos que adopto nuestro país en los
últimos años”.

Ademas, el presidente de la comunidad armenia de Cordoba, Eduardo
Torosian, transmitio el “beneplacito” de los cordobeses de origen
armenio con estos apoyos, recordando que en su provincia la Ley
9.585 adhiere al Día de Accion por la Tolerancia y el Respeto entre
los Pueblos.

Luego de conocerse la noticia, el parlamento provincial de Santa
Cruz, por iniciativa de los diputados del FpV Carlos Albrieu y Alexis
Quintana, tambien adhirio a los actos por el centenario del Genocidio
Armenio, basandose en la Ley 26.199.

En lo que va del año, las legislaturas de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires,
Santa Fe, Cordoba y Chubut ya expresaron su adhesion y solidaridad a
las actividades que lleva a cabo la comunidad armenia al cumplirse
cien años del genocidio contra el pueblo armenio perpetrado por el
Estado turco.

From: A. Papazian

US LEADERS WOULD RATHER KEEP TURKEY HAPPY THAN RECOGNIZE THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Quartz
April 10 2015

Written by Jake Flanagin @jakeflanagin

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian
genocide–when Ottoman authorities arrested more than 200 prominent
ethnic Armenians living in Constantinople in 1915. Also known as
the Armenian Holocaust, the Medz Yeghern (“Great Crime” in Armenian)
refers to the systemic extermination and mass deportation of ethnic
Armenians living within the Ottoman Empire during and after World War
I. Ultimately, more than 1.5 million were killed, and millions more
were displaced from their ancestral homelands in Anatolia. Each year,
on Apr. 24, Armenians all over the world honor the dead, along with
the governments of more than 20 nations, including Canada, Sweden,
Italy, France, Argentina, and Russia, to name a few.

The United States of America–home to the second-largest Armenian
community outside of Armenia–does not.

On Mar. 18, 2015, four US congressmen–representatives Robert Dold
of Illinois, Adam Schiff of California, David Valadao of California,
and Frank Pallone of New Jersey–introduced a bipartisan resolution
to formally recognize the Armenian genocide at the federal level.

According to a press release, the Armenian Truth and Justice Resolution
“calls upon the administration to work toward equitable, constructive
and durable Armenian-Turkish relations based upon the Republic of
Turkey’s full acknowledgement of the facts and ongoing consequences
of the Armenian Genocide.”

That last part is important. If you’re wondering what’s kept the US
government from recognizing the Armenian genocide all these years,
the answer is simple: the Republic of Turkey. The successor state
to the Ottoman Empire has adamantly denied the Armenian genocide
for decades–preferring to characterize the violence as part of the
broader chaos that broke out in the wake of World War I. Historians
generally agree that Turkey’s Armenians were targeted for supposedly
cooperating with the Russians during the war. Others, however, point
out that interethnic animosity between Turks and Armenians stretches
back hundreds of years.

In 2014, members of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
adopted a resolution to “remember and observe the the anniversary
of the Armenian Genocide on Apr. 24.” Turkey’s government objected
strongly, claiming the verbiage (referring to the conflict as a
“genocide,” to be precise) “distorts history and law.”

“We condemn those who led this prejudiced initiative,” the Turkish
foreign ministry wrote in a statement.

In January 2015, sitting Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan called
for an “impartial board of historians” to review the matter. “If
the results actually reveal that we have committed a crime, if we
have a price to pay, then as Turkey we would assess it and take the
required steps,” he told Turkish state media, according to Agence
France-Presse. “If [the Armenians] are really sincere in this matter,
let us give it to the historians. Let the historians deal with the
matter. We have opened our archive and presented more than a million
documents,” he added. “If Armenia also has an archive, then they
should open it too … Then we can sit and talk as politicians.”

Armenian leaders have refused any such arrangement, believing–along
with most of the world–the genocide to be a fact of history. The
concern therefore is that any supposed “impartial review” would
actually serve as an opportunity for the Turkish government to its
revisionisms into mainstream thought. Yerevan, rightfully so, is
not willing to compromise the truths of what is probably the most
definitive event in modern Armenian history.

And yet, despite what appears to be blatant doublespeak on the part of
Turkish lawmakers, the US government remains steadfastly silent on the
issue. At the same time, it’s not exactly difficult to determine why.

Given the fraught nature of US operations in the Middle East today,
it’s likely the nominal recognition of the Armenian genocide isn’t
a top priority for the White House or state department–Turkey being
a key regional ally.

These political considerations doesn’t cut it with everyone in
Washington, however.

“But we cant’t play politics with something this important,” Dold
insisted to Quartz. “This is about recognizing right versus wrong.”

For Dold, it’s also an issue that hits close to home–he represents
Illinois’s tenth congressional district, home to a sizable community
of Armenian diaspora. “I have constituents whose family members were
lost in the genocide,” he explains.

But, for Dold, the need for formal, US recognition of the genocide goes
far beyond even what it would mean to Armenian Americans. “It’s not
just an obligation to the Armenians, it’s an obligation to mankind,”
he says. The purpose of federal recognition is to create an official
framework to prevent such atrocities from reoccurring. He notes an
infamous quote attributed to Adolf Hitler, when briefing his generals
before the 1939 invasion of Poland: “Who, after all, speaks today of
the annihilation of the Armenians?”

“If we really want to believe ‘never again,'” Dold says, recalling the
popular slogan for Holocaust remembrance, “We first have to recognize
what’s gone on.”

From: A. Papazian

IN CONVERSATION WITH PRINCIPAL DANCER DAVIT KARAPETYAN — SAN FRANCISCO BALLET’S ‘SHOSTAKOVICH’

Huffington Post
April 8 2015

Sean Martinfield

San Francisco Ballet’s Program 6, Shostakovich Trilogy, opens
Wednesday, April 8 and will run for seven performances through Sunday,
April 19. A major hit of the 2014 season, the triptych choreographed
by Alexei Ratmansky is set to Dmitri Shostakovich’s Symphony
No. 9, Chamber Symphony in C minor, and Piano Concerto No. 1. The
choreography for the second piece is narrative and reflects on the
life of the composer. Previously acclaimed for his characterization
of Shostakovich, Principal Dancer Davit Karapetyan will appear in six
of seven performances, Ruben Martín Cintas debuts in the role Sunday,
April 11 at 2:00.

I saw Davit Karapetyan first in 2006 as Prince Siegfried in
the Company’s previous production of Swan Lake. It was the final
presentation of the program, Lorena Feijoo danced the dual roles of
Odette and Odile. Davit was then in his first season with SF Ballet,
but this particular role had been in his head and heart since
schooldays. His technical proficiency and classic allure were an
ideal match for the fiery dynamism of the internationally acclaimed
ballerina. The results were golden. The art was spectacular. “I love
Swan Lake,” said Davit.

“When I was in school, I was always thinking, ‘It would be great
if they would do a full-length Swan Lake.’ But it was a little too
soon – the strength, the skills, a lot of things. When I came here,
I felt ready. It was such a joy to dance it and Lorena was amazing. I
had a great time. Swan Lake is another ballet that requires a lot of
acting and with different interpretations to bring-out the character
and the story. But for Shostakovich – I had heard a lot of his works,
but I didn’t know much about his life.”

Davit Karapetyan in Ratmansky’s Shostakovich Trilogy. Photo, Erik
Tomasson

“His life was something that I had to feel deep inside – how he
was with his wives, how they left him. Alexei said he was really in
love with his first wife. When she passed away he was heartbroken,
devastated. The second wife was a little bit lighter, she was younger
– but it didn’t last long. The third was there when he was sick and
left with nothing.”

The Chamber Symphony consists of five overlapping movements and stands
out as the most biographical of the composer’s works. The talking
points include his startling musical genius, his troubled career under
the watch of the Stalin regime, three complicated marriages, miserable
health, his open defiance of Fascism expressed in state-ordered music,
and his fear of being forgotten. That’s a lot of passion to pack into
a piece that runs about twenty-two minutes and includes a death scene.

But passionate expression (maybe defiance) is nothing new to Davit
Karapetyan. His parents got a strong dose of it when he was six.

“My father was a dancer, my mother and sister were dancers. It was all
about dancing. And I didn’t want to hear about it! My father started
in ballet and went to a company in Armenia. But since Armenian folk
dancing was so popular, he changed to folkloric dance. My mom finished
at a big folkloric dance school and then joined a company there. I was
always fascinated when watching ballet, but I didn’t want to learn it.

When I was six, my parents wanted me to go to the ballet school. I said
I hated it and was not going to do it. ‘I am going to do everything
opposite of what they tell me so they don’t pick me!’ I did exactly
what I wanted and did not get picked for the ballet school. If you go
in when your six, then you join the ballet. But there is a folkloric
section in the same school which starts when you’re twelve.

So, I went into the martial arts, swimming, and a lot of sports. I was
a competitive person, but more with just myself. I wanted to be best
at whatever I was doing – and then I would try something else. I think
I might have continued with gymnastics if my trainer had not moved to
Los Angeles. I was seven and said, ‘I don’t want any other coach!’ –
and stopped. Then I tried taekwando. I loved it and got so into it.”

Davit Karapetyan and Yuan Yuan Tan in Neumeier’s The Little Mermaid.

Photo, Erik Tomasson

“When I was twelve, my parents tried again – ‘Let’s go back to the
school, but for the folkloric part.’ So – why not. The ballet school
is like a college. It was basically Russian training – it was the
Soviet time and my teachers had all learned in Moscow or St.

Petersburg. I started in folkloric dance but, at the same time, I’m
doing taekwando. After the second year, I saw a ballet class where the
guys were doing all these jumps. I stood in the doorway with my mouth
open. I went home and said I wanted to do ballet. ‘We took you and you
didn’t like it, it’s too late, just stick with the folkloric dance.’
No! I want to try!”

Two years later, Davit was on his way to St. Petersburg to enter a
competition. He had prepared excerpts from Giselle and Don Quixote.

Despite his determination, he soon realized he was out of his league.

Those lost years of early training were evident in the first round.

“I didn’t pass the competition, but I gained a lot of knowledge. The
guys were just in a different place. Coming back home, I had a whole
other mentality about how to work – how to keep myself, how to partner
a girl, how to talk to people. How to be a dancer.”

By sixteen – having put his black belt in taekwando aside – Davit was
on his way to Switzerland, to the Schweizerische Ballettberufsschule
(the Tanz Akademie Zurich). By submitting an audition tape, the school
had offered him the Rudolf Nureyev Scholarship.

“My parents didn’t want me to go. I didn’t fully understand, but
looking back, there are a lot of things that could have gone wrong.

When you’re by yourself, anything can happen. I promised it was not
going to be a waste, I wasn’t going just for fun. ‘I’m going to learn
what I need to learn to become one of the best dancers, to do the
roles I’ve dreamt about, to dance in one of the best companies.'”

Maria Kochetkova and Davit Karapetyan in Possokhov’s Bells. Photo,
Erik Tomasson

Since joining San Francisco Ballet, Davit has danced all the leading
roles in the major story ballets and a vast number of modern works
by choreographers including Helgi Tomasson, Val Caniparoli, William
Forsythe, Mark Morris, Jose Carlos Martínez, Alexei Ratmansky, Antony
Tudor, and Yuri Possokhov. I asked Davit about his favorite ballet,
a role he would like another shot at – perhaps one he might miss
repeating because of timing and schedules.

“Everything I do, I would want to do again. Every time you dance you
learn so much. You live differently, every performance. Each time,
you will find a different way of pursuing the movements and feel
comfortable and confident. First performances are about doing the
choreography – like being on the count. A lot of times – we don’t have
a lot of time. But by the second and third performance your emotions
are different, you are more confident. That will translate to the
audience. My favorite ballet? Everything I do becomes my favorite
ballet. It has to be. It is my job to dance, yes – but I’m dancing
because I want the audience to understand what I’m doing. It’s either
a physical or emotional piece. I want them to like what I am doing.

But, fifteen years ago? OK – I would have said, ‘Don Quixote is
my favorite, Giselle is my favorite’ – the classics that I was so
fascinated with. But right now, whatever I dance, becomes my favorite
ballet.”

Then that includes the final offering of the season opening May 1,
Helgi Tomasson’s Romeo and Juliet and the music of Sergei Prokofiev.

And another romantic partnering with his spouse since 2011, Principal
Dancer Vanessa Zahorian.

Vanessa Zahorian and Davit Karapetyan in Tomasson’s Romeo & Juliet.

Photo, Erik Tomasson

From: A. Papazian

CAR BOMB TERROR ATTACK IN SYRIA KILLS MINOR, INJURES 7 CIVILIANS – GOVERNOR

(c) AFP 2015/ ABD DOUMANY
MIDDLE EAST
00:03 11.04.2015Get short URL
700
One child has been killed and seven civilians have been injured as a
result of a car bomb detonated in the city of Homs in western Syria
on Friday.

BEIRUT (Sputnik) — A child died and seven civilians were injured as
extremists detonated a car bomb in the city of Homs in western Syria
on Friday, the governor of the city told Sputnik.

ISIL Executes 10 Doctors in Iraq for Refusal to Treat Militants Syria
has been mired in civil war since 2011, with the government fighting
against many insurgent and extremist groups. The city of Homs has been
a hotspot for hostilities between the armed groups of opposition and
government forces since the start of the conflict.

“One child has been killed and seven civilians have been injured
as a result of blasting a car bomb near a reservoir in the Armenian
quarter in Homs,” the city governor, Talal Barazi said.

The explosion also damaged a number of houses and shops in the area,
and set on fire several cars parked near the site of the terror attack,
he added.

The attack represents an attempt to destabilize the security regime
established in the city, the governor said.

Read more:

From: A. Papazian

AS ARMENIA COMMEMORATES MASSACRES, POPE CALLS FOR HOPE, RECONCILIATION

Catholic New York
April 9 2015

By CAROL GLATZ

In the run-up to the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, Pope
Francis decried humanity’s ability to systematically exterminate its
own brothers and sisters.

He asked that God’s mercy “help all of us, in the love for the truth
and justice, to heal every wound and expedite concrete gestures of
reconciliation and peace among nations that still are unable to come
to a reasonable consensus on interpreting such sad events.”

The pope’s remarks came during a meeting at the Vatican April 9 with
a group of bishops from the Armenian Catholic synod. The bishops were
in Rome, together with numerous priests, religious and lay faithful,
to take part in a liturgy April 12 that was to be concelebrated by Pope
Francis and Armenian Catholic Patriarch Nerses Bedros XIX Tarmouni.

April 24 will mark the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the
Armenian genocide. An estimated 1.5 million Armenians–more than half
the Armenian population at the time–died in a forced evacuation from
their traditional territory in the Ottoman-Turkish Empire from 1915
to 1918.

Turkey rejects the accusation of genocide, saying the deaths were
due largely to disease and famine.

The Armenian genocide has not received universal recognition. Some
governments, such as Belgium, France, Cyprus, Canada and Russia,
have adopted resolutions affirming events, while others, including
the United States, have not formally recognized the genocide. Papal
speeches and the Vatican have not used the term “genocide” when
referring to the tragedy.

Pope Francis’ written speech to the bishops said the human heart
was capable of “unleashing the darkest forces, capable of going as
far as systematically planning the annihilation of its brother, to
consider him an enemy, an adversary or even someone devoid of the
same human dignity.”

However, “for believers,” reflecting on the evil waged by humankind
leads to “the mystery of the participation in the redemptive Passion”
as many Armenians continued to proclaim their belief in Christ even
to the point of “bloodshed or death caused by starvation in the
interminable exodus they were forced into,” he said.

Pope Francis recalled how Pope Benedict XV intervened by asking the
Sultan Mehmed V “to end the massacres of the Armenians.”

He also noted “with sadness” how those who survived the forced
expulsions 100 years ago flooded to neighboring regions, which today
are seeing their Christian presence put into danger once again.

The suffering of the Armenian people in a certain sense is an extension
of Christ’s passion, he said, and as such gives way to the hope and
joy of his resurrection.

It is up to Armenian Catholic leaders to help the faithful “know how to
read reality with new eyes” and be able to not just remember the past,
but to draw from it new energy “to nourish the present with the joyous
proclamation of the Gospel and with the witness of charity,” he said.

The pope noted how Armenia is considered the first country to have
accepted Christianity as its state religion in 301 A.D. and how it
has been able to pick itself up again “after so much persecution
and trials.”

He invited the Armenian community always to look to the Lord and “to
ask God for the gift of the wisdom of heart; the commemoration of the
victims 100 years ago places us, in fact, before the shadows of the
‘mysterium iniquitatis’ (the mystery of evil).”

–CNS

,12517

From: A. Papazian

Kim Kardashian: Fomenting a Revolution in Armenia

Armen Arakelyan
20:16, April 10, 2015

These days, in Armenia, everything inhales and exhales Kim Kardashian.

The international press follows her every movement. And since the
media links her visit to Armenia with the 100th anniversary of the
Genocide, Kim Kardashian is a virtual hero who has single handedly
publicized not only Armenia but the issue of the Armenian Genocide and
the demands of the Armenian people in an unprecedented scope, just due
to who she is – Kim Kardashian.

What is occurring regarding her trip to Armenia can only be described
as a revolution of thought and perception.

She has completely changed the conceptions of morality. She has
removed it from the mold of traditinalism and conservatism, and has
forced us to think as to which is more moral – to take refuge in the
norms of morality and a system of values and to continue to record
real defeats and engage in the self-deceptive myth of moral victories,
or to use the capital obtained at the expense of conduct and lifestyle
unbecoming our mentality in the service of national objectives and to
gain benefits by doing so.

Exploiting her image and name forces us to understand that when faced
with the specter of global immorality, struggling to sacrifice the
fact and truth of the Genocide by the use of double standards in the
name of political machinations and interests, it is meaningless to
retain the spotless moral image as a shield; it’s a principle that
essentially isn’t appreciated by anyone.

If, prior to Kim’s visit, even the theoretical possibility of linking
her name to the international recognition of the Genocide was
everywhere considered unacceptable, now, the dominant approach is that
if this American TV star permits herself to be used in such fashion,
then why not? What’s important, regardless of the nature of her circle
of fans and followers, is to bring the message home and to focus the
attention of the world on Armenia and the demand to garner
international recognition of the Genocide. As to what we should call
exploiting the name of another to pursue one’s own interests perhaps
doesn’t need comment. What’s essential is that the process, in itself,
ceases to be considered immoral. This is a case when the objective
justifies all possible means. On this point, a society wide consensus
and understanding seems to have been formed.

Nevertheless, seeing the furor that Kim has engendered in Yerevan one
can unequivocally say that it is good that she came to Armenia not on
April 24, but now. Otherwise it would have been impossible to connect
the Genocide and issue of demands with her name and character. Despite
the fact that the international media presents her Armenia visit in
the context of the 100th anniversary, at least it is stressed that Kim
has come to discover and experience her roots; in essence a quest of
self-identity. During this period surrounding April 24, this factor
wouldn’t have played a role and the question still remains what would
have emerged as the bigger media story – the participation of
delegations scores of countries in commemorative events here in
Yerevan, or the presence of Kim Kardashian? To equate that “brand”
with the Genocide could have had irreversible repercussions. This is
because despite the purely informational level of the issues mass
publicization, which Kim is doing just by her presence, after a
certain limit it leads to its simplification, generalization and
patternization.

The other phenomenon of this revolution of perceptions is the
transformation of Kim Kardashian’s character itself. Before stepping
onto Armenian soil, she was perceived of as a woman of “loose” morals
in the Armenian public eye. A woman, given her entire nature, lie and
conduct, didn’t fit within the entrenched mold of an Armenian woman in
our society. However, during her time here in Armenia, she has easily
transformed from a porno star, as described by many, into a heroic
woman concerned with national affairs and one exhibiting a will to
struggle.

Even such details, which at first glance have no connection to one
another, prove such a process. Kim was first photographed against the
backdrop of the Mayr Hayastan (Mother Armenia) statue, and her sister
made some posts about the spirit of struggle of Armenian women. And in
the official communiqué released by the government regarding her
meeting with Prime Minister Hovik Abrahamyan the stress is placed on
the expectations of Kim to struggle in the name of national issues.
Perhaps this was done to convince Kim of her heroism, to encourage her
and with the aim to motivate her to cooperate with Armenian
organizations. But this transformation, for many, especially for young
women and girls, will turn Kim Kardashian into an object to be copied.
If the heroic character of the Armenian woman was traditionally
embodied mostly, or more correctly exclusively, by historical figures
which have no present life (as for example Queen Parantzem or Sos
Mayrik), now there is a more tangible, accessible, and acceptable
model. We are referring to a person, who solely by her external
appearance, extreme diligence, energy and will power, has constructed
a life from nothing and reached the heights of recognition. This is a
person who, apparently without creating any spiritual value, has
nevertheless been transformed into a symbol that carries within it all
the splendor and suffering of a contemporary pop-art. These are
factors that make Kim Kardashian so enticing for others to copy. This
is the consequence or price that perhaps is demanded when we exploit
the name and authority of Kim Kardashian. This consequence cannot be
overlooked by the clever experts perhaps now taking bets on her
“brand”.

The other side of this revolution however, which isn’t apparent, is
the manipulative effect of the Kim Kardashian factor. This is a
consequence that is very delicately overlooked in the general euphoric
situation. Kim’s visit to Armenia left everyone and everything in a
shadow. Today, there is no more important topic there where Kim went,
what she ate, whom she ate with, when and how much, what she posted on
the social websites and what the international press is writing about
her. In this general zombified and topsy-turvy situation, no one
observes, let alone debates, the tragic socio-economic reality in
Armenia where there are no positive indicators left.

The intensified situation along the border has been forgotten, along
with the possibility of war breaking out or the revelations of studies
conducted between 2011-2013 of the gas supply sector resulting in
another $250 million in the foreign debt of Armenia and the increased
energy dependece of the country on Russia.

Most importantly, no one is any longer interested as to the conditions
and substantiations by which Jirayr Sefilyan and Garegin Chukaszyan
(leaders of the “100 Anniversary Without the Regime”) were first
detained and then arrested, and how it occurred that these two events
– Kim’s visit and these arrests – dovetailed. Was it purely by
accident?

When viewing this Kim Kardashian movie ends (which has been well
staged), and the euphoria gives way to sober thought, Arul 24th
commemorative vents’ will enter their final stage.

After this Jirayr Sefilyan and his friends might be released. And
while this might be the best outcome of the given situation, the legal
aspects of their arrests will remain unanswered.

In the end, the manipulative effect of Kim Kardashian during this week
will have killed two birds with one stone – the first for external
consumption and the second, domestically.

The only positive revolutionary outcome of all this is that society
has seen, and perhaps learnt, how the process of manipulating
information flows, via sleight of hand, has taken place before their
eyes.

From: A. Papazian

TURQUIE
Turquie : prison requise pour avoir publié un dessin de Charlie

Un procureur d’Istanbul a requis quatre ans et demi de prison contre
deux journalistes turcs qui avaient illustré leur éditorial d’une
caricature controversée du prophète Mahomet extraite de l’hebdomadaire
satirique français Charlie Hebdo, ont rapporté les médias turcs.

Les deux journalistes du quotidien Cumhuriyet visés, Ceyda Karan et
Hikmet Cetinkaya, ont été formellement inculpés d'”incitation à la
haine” et “insulte aux valeurs religieuses” et renvoyés devant un
tribunal, a précisé le quotidien Hürriyet sur son site internet.

Seul dans tout le monde musulman, Cumhuriyet avait reproduit dans son
édition papier du mercredi 14 janvier deux versions réduites de la
“une” du numéro publié par Charlie Hebdo après l’attentat qui a décimé
sa rédaction le 7 janvier à Paris pour accompagner deux éditoriaux de
MM. Karan et Cetinkaya.

Ce dessin représente Mahomet la larme à l’oeil et tenant une pancarte
“Je suis Charlie”, le slogan des manifestants qui ont défilé en France
et à l’étranger pour condamner les attaques jihadistes qui ont fait au
total 17 morts à Paris.

samedi 11 avril 2015,
Stéphane (c)armenews.com

From: A. Papazian

Armenia’s government announces April 23 a day off

YEREVAN, April 11. /ARKA/. Armenia’s government decided, at its
meeting on April 11, to make April 23 a day off and Saturday April 18
a working day instead, the government press office reported.

The change is made as the Armenian genocide victims will be sanctified
on April 23, the head of the government staff David Harutiunyan said.

On April 23, one day before April 24, the day of commemoration of the
victims of Armenian Genocide, the victims will be sanctified in the
Saint Echmiadzin Church, and this will be one of the most important
historic events, since the last sanctification in Armenia was
conducted 400 years ago.

Armenian genocide was the first genocide committed in XX century.
Turkey rejects the accusation of massacres and the killing of one and
a half million Armenians during World War I.

The fact of the Armenian genocide is recognized by many countries,
particularly by Uruguay, Russia, France, Lithuania, most of the U.S.
states, as well as by the parliaments of Greece, Cyprus, Argentina,
Belgium, Wales, National Council of Switzerland, Common House of
Canada, the Seym of Poland and lower house of Italian parliament. -0–

From: A. Papazian