Author: Jabejian Elizabeth

ARONYAN TAKES THE LEAD IN GRAND PRIX SERIES TOURNAMENT IN NALCHIK

PanARMENIAN.Net
28.04.2009 15:40 GMT+04:00

Having earned 7 points in the previous rounds, Levon Aronyan continues
to remain the sole leader in the tournament. Peter Leko (Hungary),
with 6.5 points, comes next. The Aronyan-Leko match will take place
in the 13 round. Thus, in case of defeating Gata Kamsky (USA) in the
last but one round, 1,5:1,5 score will be enough for Aronyan to secure
his victory in the tournament.

The matches are scheduled for April 15-19, 21-24 and 26-29. Rest days:
April 20 and 25.

11th round matches:

Kasimdzhanov-Aroyan – 1.5:1.5 Svidler-Hakpbyan – 1.5:1.5
Alekseev-Kamsky -1.5:1.5 Ivanchuk-Grischuk- 1:0 Bacrot-Karyakin –
1:0 Gelfand-Mamedyarov – 1:0 Elianov-Leko – 1.5:1.5

Standings after the 11th round: Aronyan – 7; Leko – 6.5; Hakobyan,
Alekseev, Bacrot – 6; Grischuk, Svidler – 5.5; Karyakin, Mamedyarov,
Elianov, Kamsky, Kasimdzhanov, Gelfand – 5, Ivanchuk – 4.5

12th round matches

Kamsky-Aronyan Hakobyan-Gelfand Leko – Kasimdzhanov Mamedyarov –
Elianov Karyakin – Svidler Grischuk – Bacrot Alekseev – Ivanchuk

BRAZILIANS PAID TRIBUTE TO ARMENIAN GENOCIDE VICTIMS

PanARMENIAN.Net
28.04.2009 19:28 GMT+04:00

On April 23, Genocide commemoration ceremonies were held in San
Paulo House of Parliament, Brazil, on the initiative of MP Victor
Sapiens. The ceremony was attended by National Federal Congress members
Arnaldo Faria de San and Adson Aparisedo, as well as representatives
of national and religious societies.

Ceremony participants stressed the importance of the international
recognition of Armenian Genocide. Valeri Mkrtumyan, RA General Counsel
in San Paulo also delivered speech in that connection. Ceremonies
dedicated to Armenian Genocide 94th anniversary commemoration, were
also held in Ozasko. On April 24, "Folha de S. Paulo", a well known
newspaper in the town, published an article entitled "Not a single
Genocide must be Forgotten" (author: State Governor Jose Serra). The
article was dedicated to the Armenian Genocide and Turkey’s negation
policy, RA MFA Press Service reports.

PRESS RELEASE
United Nations Development Programme / Armenia
14 Petros Adamyan St., Yerevan 0010
Contact: Mr. Hovhannes Sarajyan, Communications Associate
Tel: +37410 566 073
E-mail: [email protected]<mailto:hovhannes.sa [email protected]>
Web site:

EU and UNDP Support in Establishment of Drug Rehabilitation Center

Yerevan, 27 April 2009 – Today, within the framework of the 5th phase
of the South Caucasus Anti Drug (SCAD) programme, Drug Rehabilitation
Center at the Narcological Clinic of Psychiatric Medical Center of the
Ministry of Health was officially opened. The Center has been
renovated and furnished and equipped with the financial support of the
SCAD-V programme, which is funded by the European Union (EU) and
implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in
Armenia.

The Center will create an enabling environment for drug addicts to
receive after-treatment psycho-social and legal support. It is
anticipated that the Center will provide both individual and group
counseling to marginalized patients, such as injecting drug users. The
resource center and the library are other opportunities open to the
patients receiving their treatment at the Narcological Clinic.

Addressing the event, Ms. Consuelo Vidal, UN Resident Coordinator/UNDP
Resident Representative said, "Drug addiction is an illness that can
be prevented and treated. Early detection, greater prevention efforts,
better treatment of addiction, and integration of drug treatment into
public health and social services programs, can free people from the
nightmare of addiction. Treating those who suffer from drugs is an
investment in the health of Armenian nation as much as treating HIV,
diabetes, hepatitis or Tuberculosis".

Establishment of this Center is another step of cooperation and
partnership between the UNDP in Armenia, the EU and the Ministry of
Health. In 2006, SCAD Programme, phase IV assisted in creation of Drug
Detoxification Center at the Narcological Clinic, which currently
provides drug-free detoxification treatment to opioids addicted
people.

The overall objective of the SCAD-V programme is the gradual adoption
by South Caucasus beneficiary authorities of EU good practices in the
field of drug policies. From 2007-09, the SCAD programme has
encouraged the Governments of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia to adopt
EU good practices in five key areas: legal assistance, drug
epidemiology/information, prevention of drug use, treatment for drug
addicts, and reinforcement of regional law-enforcement
cooperation. The programme will cover both supply and demand reduction
aspects and will facilitate the implementation of drug related
components of the Action Plans of the European Neighborhood Policy.

The SCAD programme is anchored on the EU Drugs’ Strategy for 2005-12,
which is based first and foremost on the fundamental principles of EU
law and founding values of the European Union such as respect for
human dignity and rule of law and protection of human rights. It aims
to protect public health and takes an integrated approach to the drugs
problem.

The programme also carries out research, baseline studies on drug
epidemiology aimed at the establishment of national drug information
systems, trains treatment professionals on innovative methods of
treatment and harm reduction, enhances regional cooperation between
law-enforcement operational officers, and trains educators, mass media
representatives and NGOs on primary drug prevention techniques.
Provision of technical assistance for detoxification centers and
forensic laboratories is another area of the programme activity.

***
UNDP is the UN’s global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with them on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people of UNDP and our wide range of partners. UNDP in Armenia was established in 1993 and supports the Government of Armenia to reach its own development priorities and the Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

COMMUNITY COMMENTARY: TAKING A LONG LOOK AT SHORTSIGHTED COLUMN
Talar Malakin

Glendale News Press
April 27 2009
CA

As a young adult who participates in Armenian and non-Armenian
organizations including the Commission on the Status of Women and
events hosted by the Armenian Youth Federation, I feel compelled to
respond to Dan Kimber’s recent column. ("Greet melting pot with open
arms," April 17)

Merriam Webster defines assimilating as the absorption (of one) into
the culture or mores of a population or group; to make similar. In
common usage, the general perception of the term within the Armenian
community is that it is the giving up of one’s own identity in order
to assume another’s, a loss of cultural richness in a zero-sum
system. The community even uses a common term for that concept:
"white" genocide. It is bloodless, but destructive nonetheless.

It is ironic and perhaps welcomingly timely that Kimber’s commentary
comes on the cusp of the annual commemoration of the Armenian
Genocide. The concept of preserving one’s culture — especially when
faced with annihilation in the past as well as discrimination in the
present — should not be difficult to understand or appreciate.

However, Kimber presumes that the protection against assimilation
also means the sequestering of oneself or the community from the
greater whole. There is a huge gap in the line of such reasoning,
as any debate coach would be able to point out. The preservation
and valuing of one culture does not necessarily come at the expense
closing ourselves off to other cultures.

Once again we turn to Merriam Webster, which defines acculturation
as a cultural modification of an individual, group, or people by
adapting to or borrowing traits from another culture and a merging
of cultures as a result of prolonged contact. While the Armenian
community rightfully has strong concerns regarding assimilation,
it is a wonderful example of acculturation! In fact, Kimber’s own
anecdotal evidence shows exactly that.

While Kimber expresses concern for his fellow teacher’s remarks
regarding the type of person he would prefer her to marry, let us
look at that exact moment. Unless Kimber understands Armenian, he
was hearing this point of view being expressed in English.

While the teacher may wish to preserve one cultural item (in this
case marriage), he certainly was adopting other aspects of the
community-at-large culture. In all likelihood Kimber has seen ethnic
Armenian community members speaking English, eating non-Armenian food,
enjoying non-Armenian culture from movies and television to arts
and clothing, as well as participating in non-Armenian events and
organizations. While particular individuals may draw different lines
in the sand as to what they feel is a particularly important aspect
of culture to preserve, Kimber is awash in evidence, not anecdotes,
of the Armenian community’s acculturation.

I would be remiss not to address the charge of "un-American"-ism that
Kimber levied in his article. I feel a particular sense of closeness
to and responsibility for other communities that have been victims of
genocide. The many European colonists that flocked to the Americas more
than three centuries ago were not shining examples of the assimilation
Kimber prescribes for today’s Armenian community. Rather than
adopting the culture of the indigenous population of this continent,
the Europeans forged their own segregated communities and societies
almost entirely based on imported culture from the other side of the
Atlantic Ocean . Furthermore, this was done almost completely at the
expense and destruction the native American population.

The Armenian Youth Federation is an organization with both Armenian
and non-Armenian members who help lead the community effort to educate
about and preserve the rich, multi-millennium-long Armenian culture. It
also instills core values of civic pride and civic engagement. It has
given thousands of its members to public service and military service
over the past century and to this day throughout the United States. It
beautifies our communities through projects such as its annual street
clean-up in Hollywood to tutoring programs and participation in local
charitable efforts such as this past January’s ANCA Cans for the Cause
food drive to support local food banks in this time of economic crisis.

As a history teacher at a local high school, I would expect that
Kimber would understand and further use history as a source in
distinguishing the true implications of the statement made in the
ethnic scholarship application form that launched his shortsighted
allegations. Furthermore, as a history teacher, perhaps we would
all be better off if he would share with us more about the great
contributions the Armenian community has made and continues to make
to this great city and nation, as well as the similar challenges they
face as other immigrant communities have, whether they are German,
Irish, Italian, Latino, Korean, or any of the other wonderful groups
that enrich our community as a whole. If he is not familiar with that,
perhaps he should contact the Armenian Youth Federation.

The Harvard Crimson
April 23 2009

Genocide and Its (Dis)contents

`Genocide’ debate is important, but should not distract from
Armenians’ historical suffering
Published On Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:27 AM

By MATTHEW H. GHAZARIAN

Tomorrow, April 24th, Armenians around the world will gather on what
they call Martyrs’ Day to commemorate the Ottoman Empire’s deportation
and mass slaughter of Armenians during World War I. Armenians and many
others deem this the first genocide of the 20th century, citing
scholarly consensus that the atrocities were a well-documented and
premeditated wartime assault on an ethnic and religious minority.

Not everyone aligns with this view, however’others, namely the current
Turkish government, vehemently reject the use of the word `genocide’
to describe these events. This puts President Obama in a difficult
situation. In years past, the president of the United States has
delivered a speech commemorating these events. Obama will almost
certainly keep with this unofficial tradition. But, if he omits the
word `genocide,’ Armenians around the world will accuse Obama of
breaking his promise to explicitly label the events as such. Likewise,
if he does utter the `G-word,’ a torrent of infuriated accusations
will flood in from the many who reject this label.

Word choice here is certainly very important. To label the acts
`genocide’ would put the late Ottoman government in the company of
Nazis in Germany, Hutus in Rwanda, and other perpetrators of
genocide. But no matter how powerful the label of `genocide’ may be,
insisting on its use should never come before the priority of
accurately describing what happened. While a debate over the precise
terminology may be useful for international lawyers, for activists and
ordinary citizens, studying the actual historical events and their
lessons is far more relevant and meaningful than sparring over
semantics. For Turkey and Armenia to learn from their experiences in a
productive way, both countries should resist the temptation to
concentrate too much on this single, albeit extremely powerful, word.

So loaded is the term that it can override logic itself. In an
official statement last year, President George W. Bush declared that
`as many as 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives in the final years
of the Ottoman Empire, many of them victims of mass killings and
forced deportations.’ Ironically, many Turkish activists celebrated
this description for its omission of the word `genocide,’ despite its
overwhelming castigation of the events in all other ways. Never mind
Bush’s accusation that their forebears had executed a campaign of
forced deportation and mass murder; as long as the word `genocide’ was
not mentioned, they believed that they had won.

Similarly, at times Armenian activists have allowed their fixation
with the word `genocide’ to trump their respect for historical
fact. In attempts to convince the world that genocide took place,
activists rely at times on inflated death tolls and disputable sources
to prove their points. Armenian activists must realize that the
accusation of genocide is grave and that using any source or figure
that is even remotely disputable is an irresponsible act that only
undermines their cause. Carelessly spreading inaccurate information
insults both the Turkish and Armenian peoples, slandering the Turkish
nation for crimes it did not commit as well as casting doubt on the
true accounts of Armenian survivors.

Those of us recognizing Martyrs’ Day tomorrow, then, should not fall
into the trap of arguing over whether the events of 1915 should be
classified as `genocide.’ Instead, we should find people who were
there or were affected and speak with these living primary and
secondary sources. It shouldn’t be too difficult to find
someone’cities all over the world, from Boston to L.A., Montreal to
Fresno, Moscow to Sao Paulo, and Paris to Beirut, host thriving
Armenian communities made up of scattered survivors and their
descendants, all of whom have a story to tell. And, when we do talk to
them, instead of asking, `Was it a genocide?’, we should simply ask,
`What happened?’ That way, instead of feeling the pressure to shape
such devastating experiences to a label, we can let the content of
history speak for itself.

Matthew H. Ghazarian ’10, a Crimson editorial writer, is a government
concentrator in Kirkland House.

=527825

FIRST CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT TAKES U. RHODE ISLAND TOUR
By Jeff Sullivan

University Wire
April 22, 2009 Wednesday

Sona Andrews is one of the three candidates for the soon-to-be-vacant
office of president at the University of Rhode Island. Andrews,
the first of the candidates to visit URI, is currently serving as
the provost and vice president of academic affairs at Boise State
University in Idaho.

"My experience here along with that of other institutions has given
me a real good sense of how a public institution can really create
a great learning environment for students," she said.

Andrew’s has traveled all over the world during her academic career,
but if chosen to be president of URI, it will be more of a homecoming
than a move.

Andrews was born in Providence, and when she was 6 years old, her
family moved to Millis, Mass., a small town located near the border
of Rhode Island. Eventually, her parents decided to move back to the
smallest state.

"My parents moved back to Jamestown, R.I., about 25 years ago, so
when I go home, I go to Jamestown," Andrews said.

Andrews went to Nichan Palanjian Armenia College Beirut, Lebanon,
for her first year of college in 1971 to 1972, and then went to
Worcester State College in Massachusetts to earn her bachelor’s degree
in geography. She then completed her master’s and Ph.D in geography
in 1981.

"I always had an interest in cartography," Andrews said. "My seventh
grade geography teacher Mr. Harty was the one who made me realize
that there was such a profession as cartography. It was that time in
seventh grade that I decided I wanted to be a mapmaker and pursue a
degree in geography."

Andrews said if she is elected, she will focus more on
interdisciplinary programming and modernization of curriculums.

"I haven’t really had a chance to talk to a lot people on campus, but
clearly I think there are lots of opportunities for interdisciplinary
programs," she said. "One of the things I heard when I was on campus
for my interview last week made it clear that the president can do
a good job of removing some of the barriers that get in the way of
interdisciplinary studies. The world is changing all the time and
our academic programs need to change with it."

She added that if chosen as president, she would attempt to merge
and eliminate programs to make the curriculum more relevant to the
modern world.

"I think that’s the continual evolution of what goes on at an academic
institution," Andrews said.

Andrews said her Rhode Island background gives her a local perspective
on URI and how the state functions.

"I think I have a tremendous amount of energy, which I think is
something that is needed at the university at this time," she said. "I
have a real good understanding of how to link action with planning
in budget decisions."

Andrews said she is aware of the dry campus policy at URI, and that
while she is open to changes, she said she does not feel she is
informed enough on the issue.

"This is one of those situations that I don’t have a good understanding
of all of the viewpoints of all the constituents," she said. "I think
every situation needs to be re-examined. This is a different day and
time than maybe 10 years ago. I wouldn’t be opposed to opening up
that conversation, but I don’t have an opinion on whether URI should
be a wet or dry campus."

ARMEN RUSTAMYAN: TURKEY TO DO ITS BEST FOR INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE TO BE PUT OFF FOR SEVERAL YEARS

ArmInfo
2009-04-24 13:40:00

ArmInfo.’Armenia should not make concessions under pressure of one
or another forces in solution of cardinal and prime issues for the
country’, Head of the Permanent Commission for foreign affairs, member
of ARF Dashnaktsutyun party faction Armen Rustamyan told journalists.

He said Armenia must oppose to the pressure in any case. ‘It is
necessary to fight and go all the way based on the state interests’,
he said. A.

Rustamyan also emphasized that ARFD is not against normalization
of the Armenian-Turkish relations. ‘The point is at what cost
will it happen. The recent statements by the Turkish authorities
are unfavourable for our state’, Rustamyan said and added that
yesterday’s statement by the Armenian and Turkish Foreign Ministries
under mediation of Switzerland is unacceptable for ARFD.

‘It is unclear for us why they made such a statement just a day before
April 24. If this statement is made even a month before, everything
would be probably different. However, to combine this statement in
the context of the Genocide Day means fulfill what Turkey wants’, the
MP emphasized. Rystamyan also said that perfectly realizing Turkey’s
diplomacy one should not get into its trap. ‘Turkey will never forget
its national interests. It will avail of it and will do its best for
international recognition of the Armenian Genocide to be put off for
several years’, A. Rustamyan said.

PRESIDENT: GARABAGH SETTLEMENT EFFORTS DWELL ON HISTORICAL JUSTICE

AzerNews Weekly
April 22 2009
Azerbaijan

President Ilham Aliyev has said Azerbaijan`s efforts to resolve the
conflict with Armenia are constructive and are based upon international
law and historical justice.

Addressing a Friday news conference following talks with Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev during a visit to Moscow, Aliyev thanked
President Medvedev for Russia`s efforts in narrowing the differences of
the conflicting sides in the settlement of the Upper Garabagh dispute.

"Certainly, the lack of a final result disappoints us. However, we
cannot turn a blind eye to the advances achieved in talks on settling
the problem. These advances increase our hopes for a peaceful solution
of the conflict. Rapprochement in the positions of the parties over
the recent period and agreeing of the issues that earlier appeared
as being complicated have created good basic principles for the
continuation of talks," President Aliyev said.

Aliyev voiced hope that the process of settling the conflict would
move forward in the coming months and that an agreement reflecting
the interests of both sides would be reached, in particular, within
the framework of ensuring Azerbaijan`s territorial integrity.

"Only after that will it be possible to talk about broad cooperation
in the South Caucasus," the president added.

Medvedev said the Garabagh conflict must be settled while strictly
meeting the interests of the Azerbaijani and Armenian people. He did
not rule out that new ideas might be expressed regarding peace talks.

As a co-chair of the mediating OSCE Minsk Group, Russia is actively
involved in talks on resolving the long-lasting dispute. President
Medvedev joined the process by inviting his Azerbaijani and Armenian
counterparts for talks in Moscow in November 2008.

Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian is due to hold talks during his
visit to Moscow on April 23 regarding a trilateral summit on the
Garabagh conflict being hosted by Russia, the Regnum news agency
reported.

Another source, Russia`s influential Kommersant newspaper, said such a
meeting is scheduled on the sidelines of an economic forum and will be
joined by the Azerbaijani president in St. Petersburg this June. This,
too, would take place due to the mediation of President Medvedev.

Of note, President Aliyev paid his visit to Moscow hot on the heals
of his refusal to head to Istanbul where he could have met not only
with Turkish officials, but also with newly-elected US President
Barack Obama.

On the eve of Aliyev`s visit to the Russian capital, Mathew Bryza,
the US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group brokering Garabagh peace talks,
arrived in Baku and held meetings with nearly all top officials – from
the head of state to the National Security Minister. News agencies
report that the US mediator`s meeting with the security chief took
place following Bryza`s personal initiative.

During the meeting with President Aliyev, the sides discussed the
current state of a Garabagh settlement as well as the forthcoming
meeting of the Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders.

Bryza told reporters that "talks in Baku proceeded very critically
and seriously but not enough to be negative."

The US diplomat said both presidents were studying each other`s
positions as well as those "painful concessions" that they would have
to accept.

"I hope that in the coming months – maybe, in May or June – we will
be able to achieve a breakthrough in the negotiating process on the
Garabagh conflict settlement. The nature of the talks suggests that
this breakthrough will be a real one," he told Voice of America on
a visit to Baku on Thursday, but added that much remained to be done
to make this happen.

"We will do everything we can to foster an agreement between the two
presidents," he said.

The US, Russian and French co-chairs of the Minsk Group are due to
pay their next joint visit to the region this week.

Touching on the new White House administration`s policy on the South
Caucasus, Bryza noted that it essentially remains unchanged. "However,
there is some activity and strengthening of contacts," he said,
apparently referring to the visits to Turkey by President Obama and
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The Minsk Group`s efforts have
been intensified as well.

Bryza emphasized that the improvement of Washington-Moscow relations
would neither contradict the interests of Russia`s neighbors nor
result in Moscow`s domination in energy supplies. As for Obama`s
policy on the South Caucasus region, officials said his administration
attaches great importance to these countries and intends to maintain
constructive relations with their leaders.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov said after meeting
the US MG co-chair that new positions have recently emerged in the
peace process and that they were discussed. Asked to elaborate, the
minister referred to the issue of opening the Turkey-Armenia border.

"Opening the border without the liberation of the occupied territories
(Azerbaijan`s land under Armenian occupation) contradicts Azerbaijan`s
position," he said.

At the same time, Mammadyarov said the Azerbaijani leader`s visit
to Russia could not be interpreted as "a gesture of protest against
Turkey."

Thus, the US co-chair has made it clear that Washington has no
intention to hand over its allies in the South Caucasus to the Kremlin
and would not allow Russia to dominate in energy supplies to world
markets, even for the sake of improving its relations with Moscow.

Another important statement was the message that the U.S. is trying
to coordinate the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations with the
settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. Bryza`s statement that
drastic advances could take place in the Garabagh settlement in the
coming months could not be interpreted any differently, analysts noted.

The Garabagh conflict reared up in the late 1980s due to Armenia`s
territorial claims. Armenia has been occupying over 20% of Azerbaijan`s
internationally-recognized territory since the early 1990s in defiance
of international law. The ceasefire accord was signed in May 1994,
but over a decade of efforts by US, Russian and French mediators
have yielded no results so far, and Armenia frequently violates
the ceasefire.

TURKEY, ARMENIA INK HISTORIC ACCORD
Atul Aneja

Hindu
April 23 2009
India

DUBAI: Turkey and Armenia have adopted a roadmap to normalise ties
after years of hostility which saw the two countries closing their
borders in 1993.

The two nations, which share a bitter history since the killings of
Armenians by Ottoman forces in 1915, took the step following intensive
mediation by Switzerland.

Analysts say the move is likely to have major geopolitical implications
at a time when Armenia, Turkey, Russia and Iran are engaged in efforts
to draw new energy corridors towards Europe.

The agreement is expected to upset pro-west Azerbaijan, which is
also competing for a share of the western energy markets. In a joint
statement, Foreign Ministries of Turkey, Armenia and Switzerland
hoped that the deal would strengthen peace, stability and security
in the whole region. Turkey has also advocated discussions between
rivals Armenia and Azerbaijan on the status of the region.

Envoys from Turkey and Armenia have been holding closed door talks in
Switzerland for the last two years. The thaw between the two became
visible when Turkish President Abdullah Gul visited the Armenian
capital Yerevan, to attend a 2010 World Cup qualifier between the
two countries. His host, the Armenian President, Serzh Sargsyan,
was also present. Mr. Sargsyan now plans to visit Turkey in October.

IT MAY RESULT IN SOMETHING
HAKOB BADALYAN

LRAGIR.AM
11:59:51 – 22/04/2009

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement seems to embrace a
regular phase of activation. At least, meetings on this topic, phone
conversations, visits, agreements, a future high ranking Armenian and
Azerbaijani meeting, and positive predictions that there will be a
turnover in the settlement in May or June are heard more often. This
was stated by the OSCE Minsk group American co-chair Mathew Bryza. This
entire, to tell the truth, leaves an impression of deja vu. All this
already happened and not once, when it was stated that a turnover is
very near to take place – a long waited agreement is to be signed.

The precedents create grounds to think that this time too at the
last moment something will go wrong and nothing will happen, and the
"turnover" will be again postponed and the status-quo will be still
preserved. Though it seems that there is a common approach to change
the status-quo, with which even the Armenian government agrees, which
became evident from Serge Sargsyan’s statement at his last press
conference, who said that the conversations on the preservation of
the status quo are swagger. If everyone is for the change of the
status quo, but the latter is not being changed this means that
there is some difference of stances on the measure and form of the
changes. Apparently, this difference is not related only to the ideas
of the conflict sides Armenia, Karabakh and Azerbaijan, but also the
mediators -U.S., Russia and France, otherwise they could have imposed
their own opinion on the sides as they have enough power for it.

Do now the approaches and interests of the mediator states
coincide? The next activation of the negotiation process suggests
that they may coincide, therefore the Co-Chairs are working hard to
record a turnover. But the precedents suggest that they are not always
determined by the mediator’s coincidence of interests. Consequently,
there is no guarantee that the next activation can not be caused by
this. Thus, any such phase can be new and unique regardless the types
of the other activation phases. Therefore, each phase can be decisive
and fateful.

Will the current phase be crucial? It is difficult to say because
the negotiations are still confidential.

Already there is no doubt that the United States and Europe, and Russia
are showing more interest in the settlement of the Karabakh issue, but
the potential of any of the sides to settle the conflict is not seen
moreover that each of them pursues their own geopolitical interests in
the settlement of this question. But today, those interests require not
only solution, but also active participation in the process according
to the principle "It may result in something". The point is that if
you do not succeed, you will at least be able to prevent the other
mediators to resolve the conflict.