Ter-Tadevosyan: "Defected" Armenian Soldier Said What Azerbaijan Ins

TER-TADEVOSYAN: “DEFECTED” ARMENIAN SOLDIER SAID WHAT AZERBAIJAN INSTRUCTED

12:48, 24.03.2015

YEREVAN. – Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) Defense Army serviceman
Andranik Grigoryan, who had crossed over to the adversary, told the
Azerbaijani media what he was instructed to say.

Karabakh War hero, Major General Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan, said the
aforementioned at a press conference on Tuesday, as he commented on
the respective footage which the Azerbaijani side had released.

In his view, this Azerbaijani practice is nothing new.

“I’m confident that the [NKR] Defense Army report [on this matter] is
true,” Ter-Tadevosyan stated. “As for the footage, there is nothing
surprising [in it], since the same Azerbaijan does not report its
[military] death toll, [and] always reports false information.”

NKR Defense Army conscript, Private Andranik Grigoryan (born in 1991),
had crossed over to the adversary’s side on March 22, leaving weapons
and ammunition on the line of duty. A criminal case is opened on
this incident.

On the next day, Azerbaijani websites released footage of Grigoryan’s
“crossing over” and subsequent interview. The Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic Defense Army, however, released a statement noting that the
said footage was fully staged.

Armenia News – NEWS.am

Baku: Opportunities For Peaceful Resolution Of Nagorno-Karabakh Conf

BAKU: OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT ARE NOT EXHAUSTED

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
March 23 2015

23 March 2015 – 11:57am

Azerbaijan is committed to the negotiating process to resolve the
Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, based on the principles
of international law and particularly within the territorial integrity,
sovereignty and internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan,
the head of the press service of Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry,
Hikmet Hajiyev said.

The Foreign Ministry spokesman also said that the negotiations have
been going on for over 20 years, adding that Azerbaijan declared at a
meeting of the UN General Assembly that it is engaged in this process,
but bears in mind its right under the UN Charter’s Article 51, the
right to individual or collective self-defense.

“We still consider that the opportunities for the peaceful resolution
of the conflict are not exhausted,” Trend cited Hajiyev’s remarks
during an episode of the program ‘This Week in Focus’.

He added that Armenia, which is experiencing political, economic,
demographic and other kinds of crises, should think about its future.

“And they should think about their future in the isolated situation
having the problems and claims with almost all their neighbors,”
Hajiyev stressed.

According to Hajiyev, Azerbaijan continues to support the opinion
that all the members of the OSCE Minsk Group should contribute to the
negotiating process and take an active part in it. And the issue is
not about changing the format of the Minsk Group.

“Within the existing format, the co-chairs should double their efforts
to push forward and particularly to implement the agreements and
arrangements that the sides already have in the negotiating process,”
he explained.

The most important element is now the comprehensive peace agreement.

Baku has started to establish a working group on different aspects
of the peace agreement, Hajiyev said.

Armenia tries to conduct a destructive policy in the negotiating
process, Hajiyev believes. Therefore, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
should bring the message to Yerevan about the need for it to take a
constructive stance in the negotiations.

http://vestnikkavkaza.net/news/politics/68310.html

Fewer States To Attend Events Marking Battle Of Gallipoli In Turkey

FEWER STATES TO ATTEND EVENTS MARKING BATTLE OF GALLIPOLI IN TURKEY

14:19 * 24.03.15

In his statement, Turkish President Recep Erdogan said that the
leaders of 102 states had been invited to events marking the Battle
of Gallipoli, scheduled for April 24.

According to the Agos newspaper, 25 states have been removed from
the list of invitees, but Ankara spares no effort to attract more
participants.

Charles, Prince of Wales, and his son Prince Harry are expected to
attend the event in Ankara.

The French and Russian Presidents, Francois Hollande and Vladimir
Putin, announced their intention to arrive in Armenia to attend events
marking the Armenian Genocide, on April 24.

http://www.tert.am/en/news/2015/03/24/chanakkale/1626435

AGMI Publishes Memories Of Ottoman Armenian Sportsman Vahram Papazia

AGMI PUBLISHES MEMORIES OF OTTOMAN ARMENIAN SPORTSMAN VAHRAM PAPAZIAN

17:58, 24 Mar 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan

The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute has published memories of
Ottoman Armenian sportsman Vahram Papazian. The memoirs titled “Love,
love, love” are a very unique source of the pre-genocide history
of the Armenian life in the Ottoman Empire. It’s also an absolute
historical source of the history of sports and Olympic Games, World
War I, Armenian Genocide, as well as the refugees and migration.

For the first time in the Ottoman history two Armenian sportsmen
Vahram Papazian and Mkrtich Mkrian represented the Ottoman Turkey in
the fifth Olympic Games in Stockholm in 1912.

In the chapter “On the way to Stockholm” Papazian wrote: “In 1912, the
International Olympic Games were to be held in Stockholm, and Turkey
was invited to participate. However, the Turks had no athletes, while
the Armenians did. So the Armenians decided to send their athletes
to represent the huge Ottoman Empire and succeeded. Ottoman Turkey
participated twice in a similar international competition as an empire
thanks to two Armenian sportsmen, as you will see later on. The two
Armenian athletes brought honor to their country… …When I arrived
in Stockholm in the morning, I noticed that the streets and important
buildings were adorned with flags of all the countries participating
in the Olympic Games, but there was not a single Turkish flag among
them. I was very concerned about this. After all, I was the official
representative of the Ottoman Empire, and this slight against my
country was an insult to me.

I took a car and went straight to the Turkish embassy to express my
anger. With suitcases still in hand, I demanded immediate action.

After introducing myself and receiving congratulations from the
ambassador, I said: “Bey Effendi, Stockholm is depressing to me and
I would like to return to my country with my suitcases on my arm. All
of Stockholm is adorned with foreign flags, but not the Turkish flag,
and this is an insult to me and my country. I will only stay here
if measures are taken so the flag of my country flies among all
the others.

The Turkish ambassador petrified for a moment. Like many others, he
couldn’t believe that an Armenian could have such a strong love and
respect for their Turkish country. He probably did not realize the
clear fact that the Armenians have always loved their Turkish country,
that it was the Turks who didn’t love their loyal Armenian subjects,
and have always been persecuting them on each occasion…

… And two hours later, the Turkish flag was flying on every corner,
thanks to a young Armenian, who in a few years would be mourning
millions of unburied corpses of Armenians, all of them having been
massacred by the Turks.”

As a survivor and an eyewitness of the Armenian Genocides, Papazian
also gives us important information about the Armenian Genocide.

“One of the lies about the Armenian massacres is the statement that
the Armenians were massacred because they helped Russians by spying for
them. Even if this was true, what were the massacred honest, peaceful,
and loyal Armenian population of Harput, children and grandparents,
to blame for?

Vahram Papazian’s memoirs, published for the first time in English,
have been edited by Doctor of Sciences Mr. Hayk Demoyan, Director of
the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute. The Armenian version of the
book was published in Beirut in1962.

http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/03/24/agmi-publishes-memories-of-ottoman-armenian-sportsman-vahram-papazian/

Armenian Foreign Ministry Tries To Find Out If There Were Armenian C

ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY TRIES TO FIND OUT IF THERE WERE ARMENIAN CITIZENS OF BOARD THE CRASHED AIRBUS A320

by Marianna Lazarian

ARMINFO
Tuesday, March 24, 15:54

The Armenian Foreign Ministry is specifying information about possible
presence of Armenian citizens on board the Airbus A320, which was
flying from Barcelona to Dusseldorf, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Tigran
Balayan has told ArmInfo.

“We are taking the relevant measures. As soon as we have some data,
we will make them public”, he says.

It has previously been reported about the crash of the A320 Airbus
(German Wings) that was making a Barcelona-Dusseldorf flight.

According to preliminary reports, there were 142 passengers, 2 pilots
and 4 crewmembers on board the plane. The wreckage was found near a
French village.

Armenian Political Scientist Doesn’t Have High Hopes For Georgian Pa

ARMENIAN POLITICAL SCIENTIST DOESN’T HAVE HIGH HOPES FOR GEORGIAN PARLIAMENT’S ADOPTION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION DRAFT

17:00, 24 March, 2015

YEREVAN, 24 MARCH, ARMENPRESS. The Parliament of Georgia won’t pass a
resolution on the Armenian Genocide. “Taking into account Georgia’s
trade and economic relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan, as well as
the presence of Turkish and Azerbaijani communities in Georgia, the
Armenian deputies’ discussions on the Armenian Genocide resolution
in the Georgian parliament won’t be fruitful,” member of the board
of the European Integration” NGO, political scientist Narek Minasyan
mentioned during a March 24 press conference, as “Armenpress” reports.

The political scientist noted that the ruling Georgian elite is facing
two very serious choices ahead of the Centennial of the Armenian
Genocide. “Turkey, which is Georgia’s number one partner in trade
and economy, has invited Georgia to participate in the celebrations
dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Gallipoli, and
Georgia’s decision to accept or decline the invitation will show the
relations of which country are considered overriding for the Georgian
government,” Minasyan underscored.

http://armenpress.am/eng/news/798963/armenian-political-scientist-doesn%E2%80%99t-have-high-hopes-for-georgian-parliament%E2%80%99s-adoption-of-armenian.html

La Force Du Peuple Armenien Reside Dans Sa Decentralisation

LA FORCE DU PEUPLE ARMENIEN RESIDE DANS SA DECENTRALISATION

Publie le : 23-03-2015

Info Collectif VAN – – Le Collectif VAN vous
invite a liere cet article publie sur le site Repair le 18 mars 2015.

Repair

mercredi 18 mars 2015

Razmik Panossian

Politologue canadien, Directeur du Departement des Communautes
Armeniennes de la Fondation Calouste Gulbenkian (Lisbonne)

Dans cet essai, Razmik Panossian explique qu’il est temps de degriser
ce qu’il nomme l’>, repond Erevan. Il est, après tout, le seul
Etat survivant (sans oublier l’Artsakh). Beaucoup dans la diaspora
acceptent cela et se tournent vers l’Armenie, mais sans toutefois
y retourner. D’autres repondent : , soulignent-ils, des autorites sovietiques dans les elections du Catholicosat
en 1956 a Antelias au Liban), le Comite central du Parti communiste
armenien a decide en 1957 de developper de nouvelles politiques et
de nouveaux instruments pour augmenter l’influence de l’Armenie
sovietique sur la diaspora. La manifestation la plus concrète de
cette nouvelle politique a ete la creation de la Spiurkahayutyan Hed
Meshagutayin Gabi Gomide5 (Comite pour les liens culturels avec les
Armeniens de la diaspora), suivie par la publication de magazines,
manuels, et d’autres initiatives, qui visaient toutes la diaspora. Un
document revelateur de 1974 dans les archives, intitule en Armenie, la plus grande des
multiples vagues de rapatriement. Loin d’etre une entite passive, la
diaspora, sous la direction des partis et des organisations politiques
communautaires mobilises, s’est organisee et a defendu des questions
nationales. Elle-meme etait divisee selon des lignes ideologiques :
certains dans la diaspora soutenaient la patrie sovietique dès les
annees 1920, tandis que d’autres rejetaient le regime communiste. Il
est interessant de retracer l’evolution de l’organisation la plus
influente de diaspora, le parti antisovietique dachnak, du rejet total
de la Republique dans les annees 1920 et 1930 a l’acceptation comme
une patrie dans les annees 1970 et 1980. Alors que le > global se reproduisait au sein des communautes importantes de
la diaspora armenienne, les militants des deux côtes ont contribue
a sa construction et a son entretien. Neanmoins, en depit du rideau
de fer intra-communautaire, la vision de l’Armenie sovietique et de
ses allies dans la diaspora a fini par devenir hegemonique.

Les gouvernements postsovietiques en Armenie, parfois soutenus
par des conseillers de la diaspora, ont toujours adhere a cette
logique. Bien sûr, il ya eu un changement significatif dans l’attitude
d’Erevan envers la diaspora, en particulier entre les gouvernements
Ter-Petrossian et Kotcharian. Comme les administrations successives
ont tendu la main a la diaspora, la poussee d’inspiration sovietique
a la centralisation et au contrôle est restee. Parfois explicitement,
a d’autres moments implicitement. Le ressentiment actuel chez certains
intellectuels et dirigeants de la diaspora envers l’Armenie est une
reaction aux tentatives de ses fonctionnaires pour contrôler — ou a
tout du moins diriger la diaspora — que ce soit par des mecanismes
institutionnels ou ideologiques.

En ce qui concerne la tendance au contrôle, la diaspora n’est pas en
reste et il convient egalement de noter que, dans les annees 1990,
une attitude prevalait chez certains leaders de la diaspora, notamment
dans le parti dachnak : en tant que leaders de la nation,
ils devaient gouverner l’Armenie independante — ou au moins avoir leur
mot a dire dans sa politique — sans avoir aucune presence serieuse
en Armenie. La mobilisation de la diaspora (generalement couronnee
de succès) contre les politiques de rapprochement de l’Armenie
vis-a-vis de la Turquie (par exemple, les Protocoles de 2009) est un
autre exemple de l’affirmation des priorites de la diaspora. Quand
il s’agit de relations avec la Turquie, les Armeniens de la diaspora
sentent qu’ils ont leur mot a dire legitime, et qu’ils devraient etre
en mesure d’influencer, si ce n’est definir, la politique.

Contrôler la diaspora armenienne a partir d’un centre –que ce soit
Erevan ou ailleurs — est impossible. La diaspora est trop diverse,
trop decentralisee et trop independante pour etre contrôlee, du moins
avec succès. Elle peut certes etre affaiblie, mais elle ne peut pas
etre contrôlee efficacement. Et ne devrait pas l’etre. Sa force meme,
et la force du peuple armenien, resident dans le fait que la nation
a toujours ete decentralisee. La culture armenienne a survecu au
genocide en raison de sa decentralisation, en raison de ses multiples
centres culturels et multiples communautes de la diaspora. Ni les
Jeunes-Turcs, ni le regime de terreur de Staline n’ont pu detruire
complètement tout un peuple parce qu’il y avait des Armeniens ailleurs.

La centralisation et le contrôle sont les deux faces d’une meme pièce
(et incarnes dans de nombreux Etats). Les deux sont, a mon avis,
prejudiciables a la survie du peuple armenien. Voici les trois raisons
pour lesquelles je crois qu’ils sont des strategies dangereuses :

Premièrement, comme mentionne ci-dessus, ils sont historiquement
etrangers a l’experience de la nation armenienne. L’>, avec
ses nuances de centralisation, a ete un cri de ralliement rhetorique
pendant des siècles, creant des poètes et des hommes politiques de
la communaute, mais pas des decideurs politiques serieux. Meme si
nous revenons sept siècles en arrière, jusqu’aux derniers royaumes
armeniens existants, nous voyons qu’il y avait des Etats extremement
decentralises avec de puissants princes locaux qui maintenaient le
roi en echec. La centralisation ne fait tout simplement pas partie
de la tradition politique armenienne. La centralisation communiste
s’est accomplie dans le sang et la douleur, et n’a finalement pas
reussi en Armenie.

Deuxièmement, dans la conjoncture actuelle, posons-nous la question
honnetement : la centralisation vers où, et le contrôle par qui ?

L’Armenie elle-meme est confrontee a une serie de graves problèmes.

Oui, c’est le seul Etat armenien survivant, mais c’est un pays avec
des institutions faibles, un système politique dans lequel le pouvoir
reel est exerce par des moyens informels, un système economique
oligarchique, et des politiques etrangères et militaires qui sont
entièrement a la charge d’une superpuissance regionale. Malgre les
nombreux succès qu’a remportes l’Armenie au cours des deux dernières
decennies, elle reste neanmoins un etat relativement faible dans un
voisinage difficile, avec un problème d’emigration considerable. Ce
n’est tout simplement pas une bonne politique que d’en faire le point
de debut et de fin de tout ce qui est armenien. Avoir une diaspora
forte et independante est l’equivalent d’une

http://www.collectifvan.org/article.php?r=0&id=86840
www.collectifvan.org

Syrian Parliament Speaker Calls On International Community To Condem

SYRIAN PARLIAMENT SPEAKER CALLS ON INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TO CONDEMN THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

12:04, 23 Mar 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan

Speaker of the People’s Assembly of Syria, Dr. Mohammad Jihad al-Laham
received Armenian Ambassador to Syria Arshak Poladyan on March 21.

Ambassador Poladyan conveyed to the Syrian Parliament Speaker a
congratulatory letter from Galust Sahakyan, President of the National
Assembly of Armenia.

In the letter Galust Sahakyan expressed gratitude for holding a
special sitting at the Syrian People’s Assembly dedicated to the 100th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, for condemning this heavy crime
and expressing support to the Armenian people.

The Armenian Speaker expressed special gratitude to the Syrian people,
who opened the doors and gave refuge to Armenian Genocide survivors.

“The humane attitude of the Syrian nation and its leaders is always
remembered and appreciated by the Armenian people,” Mr. Sahakyan wrote.

At the meeting Dr. Mohammad Jihad al-Laham once again referred to
the genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenian
peoples and called on the international community to condemn this
heinous crime against humanity.

Ambassador Poladyan, in turn, briefed the Syrian Parlaiment Speaker on
the events dedicated to the 100thanniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

Other issues of regional importance were also discussed.

http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/03/23/syrian-parliament-speaker-calls-on-international-community-to-condemn-the-armenian-genocide/

Refining The Vine: Winemaking In Armenia And Georgia Looking To Find

REFINING THE VINE: WINEMAKING IN ARMENIA AND GEORGIA LOOKING TO FIND MARKET RELEVANCE

FEATURES | 23.03.15 | 10:58

By GAYANE MKRTCHYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter

As the two ancient South Caucasus nations known to have grown vines
and made wine for millennia Armenians and Georgians have had as much
‘good-neighborly’ relations as competition in the ancient trade both
during the Soviet period and after independence.

As the geopolitical paths of the two wine-making nations forked after
the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union – with Georgia eventually
choosing closer integration with Europe and Armenia striving to
preserve its traditional alliance with Russia – grape-growers and
winemakers in both countries also began to see their future in the
increasingly competitive world from different perspectives.

While there may be points of difference also related to the past,
viticulturists and winemaking experts in both countries agree that
the 20th century wasn’t the best time for winemaking. The Soviet
collectivization of vineyards in the 1930s when farmers were deprived
of ownership of their land was perhaps one of the strongest blows to
the industry.

“A winemaker is first of all a person and this person needs to be
the master of his own production, the owner of his vineyard,” says
Shalva Kheruani, a veteran winemaker and president of the Degustation
Association of Georgia.

“If there hadn’t been the 70 years of Soviet rule Georgia perhaps
would rank high among wine-making European nations today,” he adds.

Avaz Harutyunyan, the president of the Union of Winemakers of Armenia,
agrees that vineyards lost their “masters” because of the Soviet rule.

“For 300 years grapes had had their master in this land. But
[after the Soviet rule] we lost our face. That’s why the world does
not acknowledge either us or Georgians as major grape-growing or
wine-making nations,” says Harutyunyan.

Even so, the two nations that claim to be the world’s oldest winemakers
lost even more in terms of the industry after gaining independence
and adopting capitalist rules of production.

Among other things it also meant that free-market rules would apply
to winemaking – an industry that is labor intensive and requires
time and money before becoming profitable. As a result, the areas of
vineyards dramatically decreased in both South Caucasus countries.

In Soviet times, Georgia’s vineyards occupied a territory of 160,000
hectares, while today they make only 48,000 hectares. In Armenia the
territory under vineyards has shrunk from 36,000 during the Soviet
period to just 18,000 hectares today. In Armenia, 95 percent of locally
grown grapes procured for the industry are used for brandy production,
and only five percent goes for wine.

While brandy making is a relatively new trade in Armenia, the nation’s
winemaking culture and traditions date back to 4,000 BC. In 2011,
a group of local and international archeologists found proof of the
world’s oldest winery in a cave near the village of Areni in central
Armenia.

But today winemaking is more advanced in Georgia, which also takes
pride in its being one of the oldest wine regions in the world.

The major shift came in the 19th century when Tsarist Russia declared
Armenia to be a “country of brandy” and Georgia a “country of wine”.

That distinction followed major investments in brandy production
in Armenia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when Armenian
brandy became famous around the world.

British Prime Minister Winston Churchill is known to have become a
big fan of Armenian brandy (or Russian brandy as he knew it) after
getting a taste of it at a 1945 Stalin-hosted conference of World
War II allies.

And while Stalin each month sent a box of ‘Russian brandy’ to Churchill
after the Yalta meeting, Harutyunyan says apart from that the Soviets
did little to promote the noble beverage produced by Armenians abroad
otherwise and its sales were mostly limited to the 15 Soviet republics.

“When the Soviet Union collapsed, Armenia, by inertia, began to
fit itself into the Russian market, instead of trying to reach new
markets,” the specialist says.

But Georgia had to look beyond Russia when the two fell out over
geopolitical matters and Moscow banned imports of Georgian wines
in 2006.

Georgian Degustation Association head Kheruani says Georgian winemakers
realized then that they needed to pay more attention to quality to
win new markets.

“We went back to the 19th century as our wine tried to find its
owners,” he remembers.

Georgian exports declined dramatically – from 50 million bottles
in 2005 to just about 9 million today. But quality, Kheruani says,
had to be raised in order to “surprise” the consumer in conditions
of suddenly stiffer competition.

“Our vineyards today have their own ‘passports’, the State determines
when the harvest should begin and end [to achieve the best results].

We have wine inspectors and it is no longer possible to procure grapes
of poor quality today,” the Georgian winemaking expert explains.

His Armenian counterpart says that quality issues aside, Armenian
wines also need to be duly promoted abroad and besides domestically
organized wine festivals Armenia also needs to organize such events
abroad – something that Georgia has done in recent years.

“In Armenia the government has put emphasis on brandy production
so that we don’t lose that as well, but problems are evident even
in that sector,” says Harutyunyan, pointing out that in conditions
of recurrent crises in Russia, which is the main export market for
Armenian alcoholic beverages, brandy production should not be the
only emphasis.

According to Harutyunyan, winemaking is just as profitable, if not
even more profitable, as brandy production and if proper investments
are made in wine production in Armenia it may provide great revenues
for the nation.

“This does not mean giving up brandy production, we just need to give
up the idea of promoting brandy as our only top product,” he says.

Recently, Armenian winemakers for the first time participated in an
international wine festival in Dusseldorf, Germany. Harutyunyan says
that participation by five companies became possible due to assistance
from the government and one international organization.

The specialist believes that for the government and leading producers
it is crucial that Armenian wines – like Georgian wines – can also
be showcased at major international fairs.

http://armenianow.com/society/features/61655/armenia_georgia_wine_making

Altercation Between Zaruhi Postanjyan And Samvel Farmanyan

ALTERCATION BETWEEN ZARUHI POSTANJYAN AND SAMVEL FARMANYAN

14:02 | March 23,2015 | Politics

During today’s parliament sitting, Armenia lawmaker Nikol Pashinyan
asked Parliament Speaker Galust Sahakyan about the report of a gas
commission which was to have been submitted at the previous four-day
sitting.

Mr Sahakyan said the conclusion was ready and will be distributed to
lawmakers in the coming four days. Minutes later, a quarrel broke out
between Heritage faction lawmaker Zaruhi Postanjyan and Republican
lawmaker Samvel Farmanyan, which was accompanied with insults.

Postanjyan said ‘the young man sitting on the right [Samvel Farmanyan]
who had managed to change several parties, need not give her advice.’
In his turn, Farmanyan said, ‘Postanjyan looks much better on TV as
a housewife than in the National Assembly.

“I have observed that she is professionally incompetent,” he said.

This finally angered Vice-Speaker of the National Assembly Eduard
Shramazanov who turned off their microphones and said, “You are not
at a market.”

Then the NA proceeded to discuss the 1915 Genocide of Armenians,
Greeks, and Assyrians in the Ottoman Empire. The discussion is attended
by representatives of Greek and Assyrian communities in Armenia.

http://en.a1plus.am/1208249.html