Author: Jalatian Sonya

NO TRILATERAL MEETING BETWEEN THE PRESIDENTS OF ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN AND TURKEY EXPECTED IN PRAGUE

armradio.am
06.05.2009 17:09

Referring to Turkish media, the Azeri Press Agency has reported that a
trilateral meeting between the Presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and
Turkey is expected in Prague. Asked to comment on the information,
the Spokesman for the President of Armenia, Samvel Farmanyan, stated:
"The information does not correspond to reality. No trilateral meeting
between the Presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey is expected
in Prague. It is simply excluded."

Has the Nagorno Karabakh issue ever been touched upon in the
Armenian-Turkish talks on the high level, as Turkish and Azerbaijani
media report from time to time?

"We have stated many times that the Nagorno Karabakh issue has never
been discussed in the Armenian-Turkish negotiations on any level. I
think that this obvious truth should be as clear to everyone as
it is clear to our society. I think time has come not to take such
information and false statements seriously. They usually make reference
to so called "reliable" and anonymous sources and include sensations
not corresponding to reality," Samvel Farmanyan said.

ADORATION EXPLORES THE NATURE OF TERRORISM AND MARTYRDOM
SHELDON KIRSHNER

Canadian Jewish News
t&task=view&id=16825&Itemid=86
May 6 2009

In his 12th feature film, Adoration, Canadian director Atom Egoyan
veers off into the harsh terrain of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Rachel
(Rachel Blanchard) and Sami (Noam Jenkins) in their bedroom. (video)

Scheduled to open in Toronto on May 8, Adoration is Egoyan’s first
overtly political movie since Ararat, which turned on the 1915
Armenian genocide.

Adoration is based on a terrorist incident in April 1986 in which a
Jordanian national of Palestinian origin, Nizar Hindawi, attempted
to plant Semtex plastic explosives aboard an El Al plane en route
from London to Tel Aviv.

Hindawi, who had ties with Syria’s intelligence services, placed
the bomb in the handbag of one of the passengers, Ann-Marie Murphy,
his pregnant Irish girlfriend.

A simple, apolitical person, she had no idea that she was cynically
being used as a pawn in a deadly struggle. If Murphy had made it past
security guards, Hindawi would have detonated the bomb, killing some
400 people.

This is Egoyan’s point of departure. In a series of scenes that frame
Adoration, the Irish woman, known here as Rachel (Rachel Blanchard),
faces an Israeli guard as she tries to board flight 016. In a thick
Israeli accent, he asks her a number of routine questions. Her answers
set off alarm bells, and she is not permitted to get on the aircraft.

Fast forwarding, Egoyan focuses on Sabine (Arsinee Khanjian), a
tormented Toronto high school French teacher from Lebanon who gives
her students a translation exercise on the Hindawi affair.

Much to Sabine’s consternation, the assignment has an unsettling
effect on one student, Simon (Devon Bostick), an orphan who pretends
to be the son of the Irish woman, and on her career.

Simon reads his essay in class and then posts it on the Internet. The
reaction triggers an emotional debate on chat lines: is Hindawi a
monster or a hero?

After a Holocaust survivor condemns Hindawi, a neo-Nazi praises him
as a hero. Their respective opinions symbolize the gamut of views on
this explosive issue.

At once dark and mysterious, and distinguished by understated
performances, Adoration shifts between the terrorist incident and
its unforeseen repercussions in Toronto two decades later.

Egoyan’s film, which is typically opaque and detached, explores
interlocking themes ranging from the complexities of convoluted
relationships to the nature of terrorism, martyrdom, victimhood,
western penetration of Muslim lands, Islamic extremism and modern
technology.

In touching on these diverse but connected topics, Egoyan adopts a
cool, neutral tone, refraining from declaring his own sympathies.

His neutrality may be disturbing to some viewers, but it heightens
tensions and endows Adoration with a certain edge.

Russian MP proposes Caribbean drill response to NATO exercises

12:32 | 06/ 05/ 2009

MOSCOW, May 6 (RIA Novosti) – A Russian MP has proposed responding to
NATO military exercises in Georgia by inviting Cuba and Venezuela to
take part in full-scale drills in the Caribbean Sea.
The Cooperative Longbow/Cooperative Lancer 2009 command-and-staff
exercise, which Moscow has criticized as unhelpful in the wake of last
summer’s armed conflict between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia,
starts on Wednesday and runs until June 1.
Sergei Abeltsev from the Liberal Democratic Party proposed holding
"large-scale drills" with the participation of the armed forces of
Russia, Cuba and Venezuela in the Caribbean on July 2.
"So that our U.S. partners do not question our peaceful intentions, [I
propose] holding the exercises under the codename of ‘Reset-2009’,"
Abeltsev said.
The new U.S. administration recently stated its desire to "reset"
relations with Moscow.
He also said the decision to hold the drills in Georgia during WWII
Victory Day celebrations was a "total revision of the history of the
Great Patriotic War" and a direct insult to Moscow that bordered on a
"malicious humiliation."
According to NATO, the drills in Georgia are aimed at improving
interoperability between NATO and partner countries, within the
framework of Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue and
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative programs, and will not involve any
light or heavy weaponry. Russia was invited to take part in the
exercises, but declined the opportunity.
Over 1,300 troops from 19 NATO member or ally states were originally
scheduled to participate, but Kazakhstan, Latvia, Estonia, Moldova,
Serbia and Armenia have already withdrawn.

ARMENIAN POLITICAL EXPERT: IRAN NEEDS ARMENIA MORE THAN ARMENIA DOES

ArmInfo
2009-05-05 13:55:00

Iran needs Armenia more than Armenia needs Iran, political expert
Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan told media Tuesday.

‘Since Iran has no other ally in the region except Armenia, this point
of view becomes irrefutable. For Armenia the way to Iran is a way to
Iran, whereas for Iran Armenia is a way to Europe. In this context,
I think that the relations between our states cannot be damaged by
anything’ he said.

Unfortunately, he said, in the relations of Armenia and Russia ,
Armenia displays too much initiative and aspiration. Sometimes we are
too strenuously strive for good relations with Moscow which allows
our strategic allies in Moscow to call Armenia Russia’s outpost.

FOR ARMENIA, ACCEPTANCE OF TREATY OF KARS MEANS RENUNCIATION OF CERTAIN HISTORIC TERRITORIES, HISTORIAN SAYS

NOYAN TAPAN
MAY 5, 2009
YEREVAN

"History shows that the Turkish diplomacy is always the winner at
decisive moments," Edik Minasian, the Dean of Yerevan State University
History Department, said at the May 5 press conference. He reminded
that after World War I Turkey was on the verge of division into parts,
but it found a possibility to solve the issue in favor of itself.

According to the historian, now the Turks are again trying to extort
dividends beneficial for themselves in their relations with the
Armenians having a goal to achieve Armenia’s and Diaspora’s renouncing
the demand of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide and
solution of the Nagorno Karabakh problem in favor of Azerbaijan.

E. Minasian added that he has doubts concerning some analysts’
conviction that Turkey can establish relations with Armenia without
preconditions. "The Turks will not sign a memorandum for no particular
reason," he said touching upon the April 22 statement signed by the
Armenian and Turkish Foreign Ministers.

Commenting upon the information spread by Turkish media that by
that document Armenia has agreed to accept the Treaty of Kars,
E. Minasian said that he does not know whether that news corresponds
to reality. However, if it is right, according to E. Minasian’s
formulation, for Armenia, acceptance of the Treaty of the Kars
means renunciation of certain historic territories and the Treaty
of Sevres. The historian reminded that by the Treaty of Kars the
Armenians ceded a territory of 24 thousand sq.km to Turkey, Kars and
Surmalu were given to Turkey and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan.

RAPPORTEUR OF PACE COMMITTEE ON MIGRATION, REFUGEES AND POPULATION JOHN GREENWAY VISITS ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
05.05.2009 15:25 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ John Greenway, rapporteur of PACE, member of the
Parliamentary Association of the Council of Europe on Migration,
Refugees and Population, pays a visit to countries of the region:
Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan. He is in Yerevan at the moment. He
will go to Azerbaijan on May 6, following which he will visit Georgia.

Nairi Petrosyan, Spokesman for NA speaker Hovik Abrahamyan, told
PanARMENIAN.Net, that Mr. Greenway prepares a report on rights of
displaced persons in Europe.

PACE Rapporteur, who arrived yesterday evening , has already held
a number of meetings in Armenia. According to Nairi Petrosyan, John
Greeway met with representatives of non-governmental organizations
dealing with issues of refugees and internally displaced persons.

"Mr. Greenway held meetings with the chairman of parliamentary
Committee on Human Rights Mkhitar Mnatsakanyan, head of migration
agency Gagik Yeganyan. He also intends to attend the dormitory of
refugees in Nork community and meet with advisor to Ombudsman Genia
Petrosyan," said Spokesman for NA speaker.

In the evening, John Greenway will meet the president of Armenia
Serzh Sargsyan and NA speaker Hovik Abrahamyan.

1995-1997: KERKORIAN’S FAILED TAKEOVER ATTEMPT PRESSURED EATON TO FIND A PARTNER
Jesse Snyder and Bradford Wernle

Automotive News
4299954
April 30 2009

On April 11, 1995, Chrysler Corp. Chairman Bob Eaton, alone in a
company-owned apartment in New York, called billionaire Kirk Kerkorian,
the automaker’s biggest shareholder. It was 7:30 p.m. in New York,
4:30 p.m. at Kerkorian’s Las Vegas office.

Kerkorian owned 10 percent of Chrysler stock — 36 million
shares. During the two-minute phone call, Kerkorian told Eaton that
the next day, he would offer to buy all other Chrysler stock and take
the company private.

Eaton expected the news, after several lower-level overtures. He had
ordered Chrysler’s lawyers to prepare a spirited defense.

Incredibly, the two titans of industry failed to communicate on
the most basic point. Kerkorian wanted to launch a leveraged buyout
financed by Chrysler’s own cash. Chrysler management would take part
in the buyout and run the privately held company.

But Eaton and his top managers saw Kerkorian’s plan as a hostile
takeover. They were determined to fight.

According to the 2000 book Taken for a Ride: How Daimler-Benz Drove
Off With Chrysler — an account of the Daimler-Chrysler merger by Bill
Vlasic and Bradley Stertz — Eaton later claimed he told Kerkorian:
"You know what I have to do. You know we can’t join you on this."

But Kerkorian insisted that Eaton had pledged to stay neutral. He
quoted Eaton: "We can’t say, hey, it’s the right thing to do, but I
won’t oppose it."

That phone call was Eaton’s last chance to head off the takeover
bid. On April 12, Kerkorian offered $22.8 billion for Chrysler. Eaton
and the company bitterly opposed the bid, which dragged on for almost
10 months before the two sides reached a truce.

Eaton’s nemesis Kirk Kerkorian’s influence â~@¢ Demands for cash
drained Chrysler’s reserves.

â~@¢ He became a distraction to Chrysler executives.

â~@¢ His hostile bid for the automaker pushed Chrysler into Daimler’s
arms.

‘Rifle Right’

The protagonists could hardly have been more different. The
mild-mannered Eaton was an engineer by training, a buttoned-down
corporate conservative who had risen through the ranks of General
Motors before he joined Chrysler in 1992. Associates say Eaton was
tough-minded and determined, but disliked direct confrontation.

Kerkorian, now 91, was the son of Armenian immigrants. An amateur boxer
who earned the nickname "Rifle Right" as a teenager in California,
he also was a skilled negotiator. In his youth, he persuaded the
owner of a flight school and dairy to let him milk cows and shovel
manure in exchange for flying lessons.

Kerkorian took risks to get ahead. During World War II, he flew 33
Mosquito bombers from the factory in Canada across the treacherous
North Atlantic to air bases in Scotland. Many delivery pilots died,
but Kerkorian survived. After the war, he used the money he earned
from those flights to set up an air charter business.

Given the personality differences between Eaton and Kerkorian,
perhaps it’s no surprise that the Chrysler takeover war was long and
bitter. Kerkorian finally agreed to halt his bid and not try again
for at least five years. In return, Chrysler bought back more of its
stock, raising the value of Kerkorian’s shares.

Eaton had prevailed, for the moment. But the experience convinced
him that Chrysler was too vulnerable as an independent and needed a
strong partner. His truce with Kerkorian triggered a chain of events
that led to Chrysler’s merger with Daimler-Benz three years later.

Kerkorian’s demands

In the meantime, Eaton worried about Kerkorian’s constant demands on
Chrysler to buy back stock. Kerkorian had ratcheted up the pressure
by building an alliance with former Chrysler Chairman Lee Iacocca
and hiring former Chrysler executive Jerry York.

Senior Chrysler executives observed that Eaton was increasingly
preoccupied with mounting an anti-takeover defense. He would raise
the issue in staff meetings on unrelated topics.

In his eagerness to fend off Kerkorian, Eaton found a buyer —
Daimler-Benz — that paid generously for Chrysler. But its beneficence
came at a price.

Daimler ultimately wrecked Chrysler’s entrepreneurial corporate
culture, former Chrysler Executive Vice President Francois Castaing
insisted.

Eaton "gave away the company to the Germans," Castaing said. "He
created a dynamic that destroyed Chrysler."

THE FROZEN CONFLICTS START TO THAW
Simon Tisdall

guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 29 April 2009 17.15 BST

Under pressure from Brussels, Europe’s ‘wild east’ is coming in from
the cold – but plenty of obstacles still remain

The EU’s invitation to Belarus to attend a special summit in Prague
next week is the latest sign a spring thaw may be taking hold along
the ragged, fraught frontiers of Europe’s "wild east". The so-called
frozen conflicts that have disfigured the region since the end of
the cold war are beginning to melt at the edges. Under pressure from
Brussels, the ice is starting to shift.

Most significant in strategic and economic terms is the burgeoning
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia, which last week unveiled
a joint road map to normalise relations after almost a century of
hostility. The plan includes re-opening the border closed by Turkey
in 1993 in protest at Armenian support for separatists contesting
Azerbaijan’s control of the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Despite effectively placing its membership bid on hold, the EU is happy
to piggyback on Turkey’s considerable influence in the Caucasus and
the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions for its own purposes. These
include the advancing of common trade, development, security and
human rights agendas and most importantly, perhaps, the securing of
non-Russian controlled energy supply routes from central Asia.

The kiss-and-make-up scenario now de veloping between Ankara and
Yerevan has thus been warmly welcomed in Brussels, and in the
US. Prospectively it makes it easier to draw relatively isolated
Armenia, which has long lived in Moscow’s shadow, closer towards
the western fold. And that in turn dovetails nicely with developing
western ties other post-Soviet republics such as Georgia and Ukraine.

A parallel thaw is underway between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which have
begun talks on de-icing Nagorno-Karabakh. Oil-producing Azerbaijan,
on the shores of the Caspian, is a crucial player in terms of future
European energy supply and transit. It pays to keep it happy. Once
again the EU, along with Turkey, has been active in promoting the
nascent peace process. And the EU’s Prague summit will host the next
encounter of the two countries’ presidents.

It’s possible to read too much into another EU-facilitated meeting
of old enemies, held last week between Georgian officials and
representatives of Russia and South Ossetia, the tiny separatist region
that sparked last summer’s Caucasus war. The talks took place in a
tent and afterwards, the Georgians complained the Russians had set
up a "hotline" telephone link but failed to give them the number. All
the same, it was the first such meeting in the conflict zone and the
parties agreed to meet again. That’s progress of sorts.

Recent political upheavals in Moldova, one of the more complex frozen
conflicts, have presented Brus sels with an additional opportunity
to advance its agenda and interests. And this opening coincides in
turn with the EU’s controversial invitation to ostracised Belarus to
attend the Prague summit.

Once condemned as "Europe’s last dictatorship", President Alexander
Lukashenko’s regime has a dismal record of misrule and was previously
blacklisted by Brussels. But by bringing Belarus in from the cold,
the EU is again signalling that engagement, based on enlightened
self-interest, trumps confrontation. Responding positively so far,
Lukashenko has taken to describing his country as a "bridge" between
east and west.

The 27 EU heads-of-government will bestow their blessing on this 21st
century brand of Ostpolitik in Prague when they formally launch a new
"eastern partnership" with six former Soviet bloc states – Belarus,
Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan and Armenia. But for all the
positive signs, plenty of large and small obstacles remain with
potential to derail the whole enterprise.

Azerbaijan, for example, opposes any Turkey-Armenia rapprochement
while the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute is unresolved. This tension, plus
the opposition of ultra-nationalists in all three countries, could
scupper both sets of negotiations. Then there is the wider issue of
how much is just talk and how much the EU can actually deliver, in
terms of financial and developmental aid, security, peace-building
and political reform to countries whose needs are enor mous and
growing. Goodwill may quickly dissipate once the six realise the new
partnership is not a path to EU membership but a substitute for it.

But the biggest unknown remains the attitude of Russia, which already
feels threatened by current trends and retains formidable wrecking
power should it choose to wield it. Whether the issue is South
Ossetia’s "Passport to Pimlico" separatists, Ukraine’s gas pipelines,
Nato exercises in Georgia, the future of Moldova’s Transdniestria
region or Azerbaijan’s and Armenia’s geopolitical orientation, Russia
will continue to have a major say in a region it still regards as
within its sphere of influence.

In fact, Russia still seems to think it has a veto. Right now, the
EU is trying to demonstrate that is not the case.

NATO REPRESENTATIVE GREETS ARMENIAN-TURKISH POLITICAL DIALOGUE

Panorama.am
18:17 28/04/2009

The President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan received NATO’s Deputy
Secretary General Ambassador Claudio Bisogniero, the press department
of the President’s Administration reports.

The President stressed that the European direction remains one of
the principle directions of the foreign policy of Armenia and the
cooperation with NATO is the most important element to it. Serzh
Sargsyan said that the collaboration with Euro Atlantic Alliance in
the frames of "Partnership for Peace Program" is a part of country’s
national security.

The Ambassador emphazised the cooperation with Armenia. The reforms
in defense have been highly evaluated by the NATO representative, as
well as the participation to NATO’s programs, especially to the program
of fighting against international terror, peacekeeping mission, etc.

The Deputy Secreatry General has also greeted the Armenian-Turkish
political dialogue and the improvements in this regard.

REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ARMENIA DOES NOT SHARE ARF DASHNAKTSUTYUN’S OPINION REGARDING ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS

ArmInfo
2009-04-28 16:06:00

Republican Party of Armenia does not share ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s
opinion regarding the Armenian-Turkish relations, Eduard Sharmazanov,
RPA Press Secretary, parliamentarian, told ArmInfo.

The said the coalition respects the ARFD’s decision to leave
it. ‘I think the future cooperation with oppositionist ARFD will
bring effective results’, he said. Sharmazanov is sure that Dashnak
parliamentarians behave very correctly after leaving the coalition. ‘I
hope in future the opposition- authorities cooperation will be
constructive and will develop via debates’, E. Sharmazanov said.