Author: Jagharian Tania

FREEDOM OF PRESS: THE RIGHT TO KNOW PHOTO EXHIBITION LAUNCHED IN YEREVAN

PanARMENIAN.Net
May 3, 2010 – 21:03 AMT 16:03 GMT

Freedom of Press: the Right to Know is the theme of an OSCE-supported
photo exhibition that opened in Yerevan today to mark World Press
Freedom Day.

The one-week exhibition is organized by the Freedom of Information
Centre of Armenia non-governmental organization in co-operation with
the OSCE Office in Yerevan and the UN Department of Public Information,
and funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID). It
features more than 30 images selected from 300 photos submitted for
the event; all photos included in the exhibition will be published
in a catalogue, OSCE press service reported.

The Head of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, Ambassador Sergey Kapinos,
welcomed the exhibition as a creative way to show public perceptions
about freedom of information and expression.

"Free access to information is key to the respect of human dignity and
enables citizens to take an active part in public life and exercise
their other human rights. This exhibition is a good opportunity to
highlight these issues and stimulate discussion," he said.

The opening of the exhibition was attended by journalists,
representatives of state institutions and civil society.

The President of the Freedom of Information Centre, Shushan Doydoyan,
said: "This is a special exhibition since everyone, journalists and
professional photographers in particular, were invited to present
their images illustrating freedom of information and freedom of
expression. These basic rights are intrinsically linked to press
freedom, which in turn contributes to strengthening democratization,
good governance and human development."

TOUS ENSEMBLE DEVANT LE SENAT Mardi 18 Mai 2010 A 18 Heures
Stephane

armenews
3 mai 2010
FRANCE

Appel aux opinions publiques

Le negationnisme est un delit. Pour le punir, il faut une loi….

Le CCAF appelle l’ensemble des Francais d’origine armenienne et
toutes les bonnes volontes attachees aux droits de l’homme et a la
condition humaine a se rendre le mardi 18 mai 2010 devant le Palais
du Luxembourg pour exiger des Senateurs l’adoption de la proposition
de loi sur la penalisation de la negation du genocide des Armeniens.

L’Assemblee Nationale a accompli le premier pas en adoptant ce texte
en octobre 2006. Depuis cette date, la procedure est bloquee au Senat.

Or, publiquement, tous les Partis representes au Parlement sont
favorables a son examen par la Haute Chambre de notre Republique. Dans
les faits, aucun ne bouge ! Aucun n’a le courage d’inscrire a l’ordre
du jour du Senat l’examen de ce texte digne du patrimoine universel
de notre Republique fondee sur les droits de l’Homme et du citoyen.

Alors que la France est de plus en plus le theâtre de propos
negationnistes a l’encontre du genocide des Armeniens, l’adoption de
ce texte conforterait la paix civile, l’ordre public et la cohesion
sociale. La France, se doit d’etre a l’ecoute de ces concitoyens
soucieux de defendre leurs droits naturels a la dignite.

La lutte contre le negationnisme n’enfreint pas la liberte pour
l’Histoire, mais protège l’histoire des interferences et des pressions
de la Turquie qui met ses moyens de 16ème puissance economique au
service de sa reecriture politique.

Le mensonge de la Turquie ne passera pas ! Sa strategie d’anesthesie
de la question armenienne se heurte et se heurtera toujours au mur
de la verite et a notre combat unitaire.

La reconnaissance du genocide des Armeniens n’est pas un acte partisan,
ni de droite, ni de gauche. C’est un acte citoyen, humaniste et
republicain. La France a eu le courage d’accomplir ce geste politique
par l’adoption d’une loi en 2001. A nous de lui donner les moyens d’en
trouver davantage pour faire barrage aux agressions negationnistes
qui s’inscrivent dans la continuite du genocide et en constituent le
volet politique.

HULIQ.com, SC
May 2 2010

Azerbaijan Can Use U.S. Puerto Rico Model For Karabakh Peace

This week the Congress of the United States passed the HR 2499
allowing Puerto Rico a referendum on its future status, but only few
saw parallel Azerbaijan’s negotiations with Armenia and U.S. Puerto
Rico developments. Yet, HR 2499 may also open a door for Azerbaijan to
look at its future differently, from a different point of view.

Azerbaijan has been negotiating with Armenia over Nagorno Karabakh
Republic for already 16 years. The issue is somewhat similar to
Kosovo’s case. Like Kosovo, the Armenian majority of Nagorno Karabakh
took a decision and referendum to declare the region as an independent
country. Azerbaijan sent troops, Karabakh defended itself. Armenia
sided with Karabakh. Nagorno Karabakh’s army liberated territories
adjuscent to its borders so the Army of Azerbaijan stops bombing from
those territories the cities and villages of Nagorno Karabakh.
Azerbaijan signed a ceasefire about 16 years ago and negotiations
continue since then.

There is no result so far. Russian, French and U.S. mediators have put
forward the Madrid principles for the conflict resolution which calls
on return of territories to Azerbaijan (except the land corridor
connecting Karabakh with Armenia), return of refugees and a referendum
on the final status of Nagorno Karabkh. Azerbaijan has generally
agreed, but has a problem with referendum fearing it will lead to the
independence of Nagorno Karabakh. Armenia has said the principles are
a base for negotiations, but the final political status of Nagorno
Karabakh and the date of the referendum should be clearly defined.
Almost one year has passed since those Madrid Principles have been
disclosed, but the process is not moving.

In the meanwhile an entire generation has come forward in Nagorno
Karabakh that does not know what it means to leave under Azerbaijan.

* Karabakh Marks Anniversary of Referendum on Independence

No Return Under Azerbaijan

In light of Azerbaijan’s past oppressions of the Armenians in Nagorno
Karabakh and its present bellicose rhetoric Nagorno Karabakh says
there is no way they want to return to leave in one country with
Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan fails to recognize Nagorno Karabakh’s right to
self determination and stresses it will never agree with a loss of a
territory. Regular war threats, coming from Azerbaijan’s president and
the top leadership, further reinforces the resolve of the people of
the Nagorno Karabakh Republic to leave independently from Azerbaijan.
This has become easier, especially after the case of Kosovo, Abkhazia
and now the latest development related to Puerto Rico.

The Problem: How To Make a Case With People of Azerbaijan

Sometimes one wonders if Azerbaijan’s president understands that
politically there is no way they can subject Nagorno Karabakh under
Azerbaijan’s control. In reality, war is not an option either. It has
not solved problems where people have longed for freedom and self
determination. Thus the problem may be how does the current top
leadership of Azerbaijan explain to its people that the government
agrees to the referendum in Nagorno Karabakh about it’s future. One
cannot, but agree, that this is a very difficult task to do, to make a
case with your own people that there is a change in course now. This
is where U.S. Congress’ decision on Puerto Rico may come handy as a
recipe.

Two Referendums May Be Needed

Everyone so far thinks of the referendum in Nagorno Karabakh as a key
to solution. However, would things become easier for Azerbaijan and
easier for it to come to an agreement if there was the option of the
second referendum on the table? Let’s look at Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico has been a U.S. semi autonomous territory for 112 years.
This week the U.S. Congress adopted the HR 2499 allow the people of
Puerto Rico to conduct a referendum to decide if they want a change in
their current status. This last sentence is very important. We are not
talking about if they want independence or to become one of the states
in USA, but only "if they want to change their current status." Now,
if the people of Puerto Rico says Yes, that means yes they want to
change their status. ONLY THEN will be constitution of Puerto Rico be
changed and the SECOND referendum will be conducted. The second
referendum will have 4 options: maintain the same status, become a
U.S. State, become sovereign maintaining a partnership with the U.S.
and finally independence.

What if the HR 2499 can also provide a key to the resolution of the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. If the problem with Azerbaijan’s leadership
is that they have realized that Nagorno Karabakh can’t be back under
Azerbaijan’s control, but have a difficult time to explain that to
their people, then this two-referendum models can make the case and
bring about a breakthrough in the negotiation process.

In any case Azerbaijan has agreed to give Nagorno Karabakh the highest
autonomy, but only if its territorial integrity is kept intact.
Whatever the final solution of the problem there will be a certain
type of change in Nagorno Karabakh’s final status then it was 20 years
ago. This will allow the parliament of Azerbaijan to take a similar
resolution agreeing for Nagorno Karabakh to conduct a referendum if
they want to maintain or change their status. At this point there is
no talk of independence. The question can be something like this. Do
you want to maintain your status or make a change. If the majority
wants to change their status, then the second referendum may kick-in.
Then the question will be what status do you want for the future of
Nagorno Karabakh and there can be already those 4 choices, or
whichever choices the people of Nagorno Karabakh will make.

The thing is that for Azerbaijan it’s easier to agree to the second
referendum and make a case with its people if the first referendum has
already been conducted. To agree for the first referendum Azerbaijan’s
parliament has many good reasons because no one wants to see this no
war no peace situation to continue dragging and reaching to the next
generation.

In our opinion this pathway is doable for Azerbaijan and may lead to
the determination of the final status of Nagorno Karabakh’s Republic.
Armenian president on April 5th said the problem can be solved "in
hours" if Azerbaijan fully respects the right of self determination of
Nagorno Karabakh.

Otherwise, if there is the precedence of Kosovo and the United States
is opening a potential door for Puerto Rico’s full independence how
will Azerbaijan continue to make a case for Nagorno Karabakh to come
back under its control. If Azerbaijan continues to speak in the
language of threats then it clearly fails to see the global dynamic
where the rights of people’s self-determination is being clearly
respected

The question is will Armenia agree to this pathway, resolving the
matter in a two-referendum model. That answer we don’t know.

Look for Peace Not Territory

The time has come for both Azerbaijan and Armenia look beyond Nagorno
Karabakh. The region is in need of peace and trust. This is what needs
to be built between the two nations. Nagorno Karabakh’s Republic,
which has already established all the attributes of democratic
governance, is not a peace of territorial dispute between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. In Nagorno Karabakh people are looking for peace and
stability. In Azerbaijan the leadership is looking for restoring
country’s territorial integrity even at the cost of war.

The conflict would have been solved very quickly if Azerbaijan would
simply understand and respect people’s right to self determination.
This is where the mediators could to a better work trying to show the
better fruits of this option. Turkey desperately wants to be a player
in the region. Perhaps it’s time for Turkey to try to convince the
leadership in Azerbaijan to look beyond Nagorno Karabakh and adopt new
approaches for buildling peace and restoring trust, not the
territorial integrity, which is so 20th century.

Written by Armen Hareyan
HULIQ.com

Prime-Tass English-language Business Newswire, Russia
April 29, 2010 Thursday 12:33 PM EET

Georgia: Russian gas transit to Armenia to resume in 2-3 days

MOSCOW, TBILISI, Apr 29 (PRIME-TASS) ‘ Russian natural gas transit to
Armenia via the North Caucasus-Transcaucasian pipeline is expected to
resume in two-three days, Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation said
Thursday.

The transit was stopped on Wednesday at 4:00 p.m. Moscow time as the
Gudauri-Kobi section of the pipeline was damaged by a mudslide, the
corporation said.

Meanwhile, Russian gas giant Gazprom said that gas supplies to Armenia
had not been limited by the closure of the pipeline as Russian gas was
being supplied from the Abovyanskoye underground gas storage facility.

RusData Dialine – BizEkon News, Russia
April 30, 2010 Friday

A customs project for Armenia

Yury Simonyan
Nezavisimaya Gazeta

In Yerevan they consider joining the Customs Union

Moscow and Yerevan are considering Armenia’s possible accession into
the Customs Union. Representatives of Armenia’s government told
Nezavisimaya Gazeta that no concrete decisions have been made, for now
"this is only an idea, which has already been heard several years
ago." "It was stated that if the Customs Union were to be created,
then Armenia might join the organization. But, at that time, there was
no organization to join," an source told the paper.

Despite the fact that everything continues to be in its conceptual
stages, supported by the optimistic statements made by Armenia’s Prime
Minister Tigran Sarkisyan and Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Igor
Shuvalov, it is time to ask the question: how probable is the
"distant", as it is called by some, membership of Yerevan in the
Customs Union. Armenia does not share a border with Russia,
Kazakhstan, or Belarus. Positioned between Azerbaijan and Turkey, not
counting the transfers made by air, it conducts its foreign trade
through Georgia and does some minor transactions through Iran.
Moreover, it cannot be said that Kazakhstan and Belarus are Armenia’s
leading economic partners.

Head of the research center Politekonomiya, Andranik Tevanyan,
expressed confidence that the idea is a Catch-22. "Armenia’s accession
into the Customs Union is just as much of a senseless act as it is an
unrealistic idea. Under what pretenses will it join the CU? Does it
plan to become an equivalent of the Kaliningrad Oblast? Of course,
Armenia’s authorities will not agree to this," Tevanyan told NG.
According to him, such unproductive ideas arise out of the policies,
implemented by Armenia’s authorities, who cannot refuse their foreign
partners; "no" is something they can only say on a local level. "The
plan to join the CU is equivalent to the idea of having a shared
currency with Russia, which was almost discussed in parliament, but
quickly faded. The reason for joining the CU is unclear, even if a
real, specific mechanism is created. If the reason is to avoid
double-taxation, we have a bilateral agreement with Russia, and could
finalize a similar agreement with other countries. If it is to
regulate custom duties, in this case, we need to consider the WTO.
They cannot be altered based on our wishes alone," says Tevanyan.

Editor-in-Chief of the business magazine Bazis, Ashot Aramyan, is
equally skeptical of the idea of Armenia’s accession into the CU. He,
too, acknowledged that this is not the first time the authorities are
considering this scenario, and said that "the plans will most likely
be halted" this time around as well. "There are no premises for, or
sense in accepting Armenia into the Customs Union. I believe that this
could only be possible if some politically-motivated decision is made,
when political principles are put ahead of economic interests,"
Aramyan told NG. According to him, the first critical question
regarding these plans worries him: Russia and Kazakhstan have serious
economies; are they prepared for the "freeloading" of Armenia, which
lacks its own natural resources? This is a scenario in which an equal
partnership is impossible: with Armenia’s accession into the CU, the
losing party will either be the organization itself, which will have
to tune into Yerevan’s economic needs, or Armenia will have to play by
the rules of the CU, thus incurring losses in the export of energy,
for example. Most importantly, Armenia is a member of the WTO, and I
simply don’t see a way of making the republic’s obligations to the WTO
and the CU not contradict one-another. One cannot have their cake and
eat it too," says Aramyan.

Jew urges Meretz Chairman not to submit Armenian Genocide Resolution
for discussion by Knesset

May 2, 2010 – 16:52 AMT 11:52 GMT
PanARMENIAN.Net –

Mark Meirowitz, an American lawyer of Jewish origin, sent a letter to
Chairman of Meretz parliamentary group of Israel Haim Horon, urging
him not to submit the Armenian Genocide Resolution for discussion by
Israeli Knesset. "I believe it to be very misguided and will only lead
to further problems and difficulty for Israel. I also want to say up
front that both of my parents were in Auschwitz, so this issue has
particular resonance and meaning for me," the letter reads. According
to the lawyer, the adoption of the Armenian Genocide Resolution by
Knesset will effect the Turkish-Israeli relation. Besides, he notes
that Israel should not put itself forward as an arbiter of what is or
is not genocide.

"I believe that the Holocaust was a unique event in the history of the
world. The other atrocities in the world should be discussed by
historians. The events that took place with Armenians almost 100 years
ago should be discussed in the context of the historical
sub-commission to be established by the Turkish-Armenian Protocols,"
the letter reads. Meirowitz also stresses that, given the processes in
the Middle East, Israel’s diplomacy should be working towards
improving relations with Turkey not creating crises. According to him,
the Armenian Genocide Resolution will surely precipitate a gigantic
crisis in the Turkish-Israeli relations, if it proceeds to the
Knesset.

Meirowitz believes that Knesset is not a forum for adoption of
decisions concerning historical events, turkishny.com reports.

MOSCOW NOT TO OPPOSE IRAN’S MEDIATION IN KARABAKH CONFLICT: NESTERENKO

news.am
April 30 2010
Armenia

Moscow does not oppose Iran’s proposal to hold a trilateral meeting
of Azerbaijani, Armenian and Iranian Foreign Ministers on Karabakh
conflict, RF Foreign Ministry Spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said at
the briefing in Moscow, RIA Novosti reports.

"We have nothing against the meeting. If such a meeting is held,
obviously, it is necessary to wait for the results and then speak of
the possibility of Iran’s mediation in Karabakh conflict settlement
&’, Nesterenko noted.

According to him, Iran’s proposal on mediation at this stage referred
only to the trilateral meeting.

Russian Foreign Ministry did not receive official proposals from
Azerbaijan to include Turkey in OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairing states,
Nesterenko stated.

‘Russia as one of OSCE MG Co-Chairs, did not receive such a proposal.

In any case, to have the concrete actions planned on the question
at least the consent of three parties is needed. Considering, that
Armenia-Turkey normalization process and Protocols’ ratification
are suspended, we can hardly reckon on such a consent," Nestereneko
outlined.

AIBA YOUTH WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS: HRAYR MATEVOSYAN ADVANCES TO 1/8 FINAL

Panorama.am
30/04/2010

Hrayr Matevosyan is the only Armenian representative to continue
fighting for the champion’s title in AIBA Youth World Championships
underway in Baku, Azerbaijan. In 1/16 final the Armenian sportsman
won against Petro Urus of Moldova and advanced to 1/8 final. There
he will take on German Thomas Fernhold.

THE REPUBLICAN RECRUITMENT COMMISSION SITTING

p;p=0&id=1299&y=2010&m=04&d=22
20. 04.10

On the 20th of April, 2010, in the conference hall of the RA MoD
a republican recruitment commission conference took place, during
which the results of the 2009 autumn recruit were summarized and
matters were discussed and brought up for appropriately organizing
and holding the 2010 spring recruit. The conference, where state
officials, representatives from legal bodies, heads of regional
administrations, RA regional military commissars, medical workers,
high ranked militants, and others were also invited was chaired by
RA MoD Seyran Ohanyan.

The head of the defence department underlined the importance of the
event, stating that one of the most important processes for the AF
is their recruitment. In the last years, due to the joint efforts
of all the structures participating in the recruitment process its
realization has been put on a higher level. At the sitting the Chief
of the RA AF GS Colonel-General Yuri Khachaturov read his report.

Talking about the results of the 2009 autumn recruit and the issues
of the 2010 spring recruit, he recalled both the positives and the
shortcomings of the previous recruit. Yuri Khachaturov touched upon
the issue of the number of conscripts, their educational level, the
statistics about those who were recognized void for recruitment, and
the work done by military commissariats and the medical commissions.

The president of the central military-medical commission Arsen
Petrosyan and the chief of the RA MoD military-medical department
Artashes Parsadanyan introduced the outcomes of the work done by the
central military-medical commission and the medical commission in the
central recruitment centre during the autumn recruit. The speakers
presented the statistics of those sent to a supplementary examination
by the central military-medical commission.

They also talked about the data about the increase and decrease
of diseases, etc. The members of the recruitment commission also
discussed matters about attaching and calculating the youth, executing
medical examinations, implementing punishments for those avoiding
conscription, etc. During the sitting, for organizing and holding the
2009 autumn recruit effectively, as well as for active participation,
a number of representatives from military commissariats, legal bodies,
medical commissions, and other structures, as well as soldiers were
awarded with departmental medals, certificates and valuable gifts. At
the end of the conference, thanking the participants for their joint
efforts in this most important issue, Seyran Ohanyan hoped that as a
result of the cooperation of all the involved bodies the recurrent
recruitment work will be carried out more effectively. Introducing
the RA President’s directions on the organization and realization
of the recruit, Seyran Ohanyan also foresaw some areas, around which
appropriate work should be done.

RA MoD Department of Information and Public Affairs

IS TURKISH HISTORY EUROPEAN TOO?

EuropeanVoice
22 April 2010

Nicolas Tavitian Armenian General Benevolent Union Europe Brussels.

The issue of international recognition of the Armenian genocide in
its current form is about a decade old. Yet the EU, and particularly
the European Commission, has gone out of its way to evade the issue,
probably hoping it would go away. It has not and will not. As you
noted in your special report on Turkey ("An agreement, but little
progress", 15-21 April), Turkey reacted strongly to one resolution on
the genocide in the Swedish parliament and to another by a committee
in the US Congress. And every year, on 24 April, the genocide will
be commemorated.

Europe now has a responsibility to address the issue.

The least the EU could do is to insist that Turkey treat Armenia as it
would a normal neighbour. The Union must begin to act on its mandate:
under the Copenhagen criteria, candidate countries should establish
normal relations with all neighbours. However, successive accession
partnerships with Turkey have contained no reference to Turkey’s
17-year blockade of Armenia. And although Europe spends about â~B¬600
million a year promoting development in Turkey, and funds a plethora
of cross-border projects, not one euro has gone on projects to promote
relations between Turkey and Armenia. This is policy, not oversight,
and it must be changed.

But that is not all. The genocide happened long ago and the dead
cannot be brought back to life. But the denial of the genocide is of
very contemporary relevance.

By the end of the 19th century, the Armenians were one of the
most successful groups in the Ottoman Empire and did much for its
prosperity, culture and intellectual life. Some Turks are rediscovering
this today. In 1915, a rich and vibrant civilisation was destroyed
in Turkey and its remnants scattered across five continents.

Few Armenians remain in Turkey itself.

In 1915, in response to US ambassador Henry Morgenthau’s protests at
the extermination of the Armenians, Talaat Pasha, Turkey’s interior
minister, responded that "hatred between the two races [sic] is now
so intense that we must finish them off, or fear their revenge".

Subsequently, denial of the crime and denial of Turkey’s Armenian
past became policy. Over the past 95 years, policy has morphed into
an attitude, and official lies into an official truth.

Anti-Armenian policies have been hard-wired into policymaking,
which is why it is so hard for the rather less prejudiced government
formed by the Justice and Development (AK) party to change course
today. This is the background that helps explain the threat, made
several weeks ago by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdogË~Xan, to expel
Armenian immigrants in Turkey and which explains the expropriation
of Armenian-owned buildings under the law on religious foundations.

Turkey’s policy should disturb EU citizens and Turks, not least
because it is so disproportionate. In 2010, confronted with foreign
parliaments’ resolutions on the genocide, Turkey refuses dialogue,
threatens to expel Armenian immigrants, takes the Republic of
Armenia hostage and threatens to suspend economic relations with
Western allies.

So what can Europe do? First, it should not itself practise genocide
denial. Genocide recognition by Turkey may or may not be one of
the conditions for accession. But the Commission and the Council
of Ministers should no longer bind themselves to the vocabulary of
denial. Enough with "the events of 1915" and "the 1915 tragedy" and
"leaving history to the historians". Say what happened, or never
again invoke the memory and prevention of war and genocide as a
justification for European unification.

There are anodyne forms of complicity in denial. In 2007, Olli Rehn
, the then European commissioner for enlargement, agreed to host
an exhibition, ‘My Dear Brother’, featuring Armenian everyday life
in Turkey 100 years ago. It had nothing to do with the genocide,
but simply invoking the memory of Armenians in Turkey was apparently
itself a step too far: José Manuel Barroso, the Commission president,
had it cancelled for fear of Turkey’s reaction. It will take a bit
more spine than that to change Turkey.

Now that the EU has taken on the project of integrating Turkey, it
will be bound to help to halt and reverse the destruction of Armenian
civilisation on Turkish territory. Much Armenian heritage there has now
vanished: churches have been destroyed, books burnt, sites renamed and
memories erased. However, hundreds of precious and ancient buildings
remain to be rescued and restored to their rightful owners, especially
the Armenian Church. In ten years’ time, many may have collapsed.

Turkey’s ability to show contrition towards Armenians, make a clear
break with past policies and help mend some of the damage should be a
litmus test of its maturity to join EU. This is all a matter of what
Europe stands for.