Categories
Official
Politics
Armenian President Armen Sarkissian has sacked first deputy director of the national security service Karapet Davtyan, the president’s office said.
Author: Shushan Frangulian
168: Active investigation underway to uncover corruption schemes – NSS
Category
Politics
The new director of Armenia’s national security service, Arthur Vanetsyan, says that the service has launched active investigations since May 23 to uncover illicit enrichment cases through corruption schemes. The director said they will soon release details.
“Preliminary tactical data were confirmed. We have detainees, people who were questioned, we are working and soon the public will be notified,” he said.
He dismissed media rumors alleging that the NSS is preparing materials against Yerevan Mayor Taron Margaryan. He said that the NSS doesn’t prepare targeted materials against anyone.
Earlier on May 19, Vanetsyan told reporters that the NSS will uncover illegally enriched corrupt individuals in a brief period of time.
Armenian MP of Turkey: Judging me will not force me to abandon fight for justice for genocide
News.am, Armenia
Armenian MP of Turkey: Judging me will not force me to abandon fight for justice for genocide Armenian MP of Turkey: Judging me will not force me to abandon fight for justice for genocide
11:03, 19.05.2018
Garo Paylan, Istanbul Armenian MP and vice-chairman of the opposition pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP) of Turkey, responded to the announcement on the launching of a criminal case against him, and under the infamous Article 301 (“insulting the Turkish nation”) of the Turkish Penal Code.
Paylan told Agos Armenian weekly of Istanbul that he has always called the tragedy which his family and nation survived a “genocide.”
“As a deputy of the Turkish parliament, I have demanded from the Turkish parliament to call it like it is,” Paylan said, in particular. “Like everywhere, also in the interview noted in the criminal case filed against me, I have said the word ‘genocide.’ But I didn’t accuse today’s Turkish people, but the then junta with a genocidal mindset.
“Sadly, Turkey currently is again rolling back and attempting to prevent—with pressures—the demands for confrontation with the past. [But] let the [Turkish] prosecutors and the Ministry of Justice—which gave a green light to their criminal case—know that by filing a criminal case against me they will not force me to abandon the fight for justice for what has occurred in the present and in the past.”
New Government program does not foresee changes in foreign policy directions – Nikol Pashinyan
Category
Politics
Armenia is determined to continue the active cooperation with the EAEU partners, Armenian PM Nikol Pashinyan announced at the expanded format session of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council. He reminded that a peaceful change of power took place in Armenia and the program of the new Government does not foresee changes in foreign policy directions. “I reaffirm Armenia’s full commitment to its international obligations, including those in the sidelines of the Eurasian Economic Union”, Pashinyan said.
He noted that the discourse over the EAEU inside the Armenian public is conditioned by the fact that the solution of administrative issues, switching to new and common regulatory mechanisms, as well as the existence of different obstacles do not justify the expectations of business to receive immediate and tangible results.
“I think that the joint efforts of the EAEU member states and the commitment to record visible results every day will reduce the volume of such discourses”, Pashinyan said, emphasizing that Armenia is interested in that. “First of all it’s necessary to ensure rise in trade and economic cooperation, to put the emphasis on new and high technologies, ensure equal conditions for business entities in practice and find solutions to the issues that directly impact on the quality of life. Finally, if economic indexes are not felt by citizens, they become statistics”, the Armenian Premier said.
Verelq: Ո՞վ է կողմ և ո՞վ է դեմ., բայց ոչ Նիկոլ Փաշինյանին, այլ ճգնաժամի հանգուցալուծմանը
- 01.05.2018
- Հայաստան
- arm
1051
Քիչ առաջ ԱԺ-ում ավարտվեցին ՀՀ վարչապետի ընտրության շուրջ քննարկումները: Եկույթ ունեցան նաև ԱԺ խմբակցությունների ներկայացուցիչները՝ ներկայացնելով իրենց դիրքորոշումը, թե ինչպես են քվեարկելու՝ Նիկոլ Փաշինյանին կողմ, թե դեմ:
ԿՈՂՄ. Արմեն Ռուստամյան, ՀՅԴ խմբակցության ղեկավար
Ես ստիպված եմ անդրադառնալ Աղվան Վարդանյանի հայտարարությանը, որը իր իսկ խմբակցության համար անակնկալ էր: Մենք, իհարկե, հարգում ենք նրա որոշումը, բայց սա Դաշնակցություն է, և այդ պահվածքին անպայման գնահատական կտանք:
Իսկ Դաշնակցության դիրքորոշումը նույնն է և անփոփոխ՝ մենք քվեարկելու ենք հօգուտ Նիկոլ Փաշինյանի: Մենք պետք է հասնենք այնպիսի հանգուցալուծման, որից կշահի հայ ժողովուրդը Հայաստանում և Սփյուռքում:
ԿՈՂՄ. Միքայել Մելքումյան, «Ծառուկյան» խմբակցություն
Մենք արձանագրում ենք, որ ներկայիս իշխանությունների սխալի չափն այնքան է, որ նա չի կարող մնալ, նա պետք է հեռանա: Մենք կանգնած ենք ջրբաժանի եզրին, եթե այսօր սխալվենք՝ հետ ենք շպրտվելու տասնամյակով: Ծառուկյան դաշինքը միացել է համաժողովրդական շարժմանը և կողմ է քվեարկելու Նիկոլ Փաշինյանի օգտին:
ԴԵՄ. Վահրամ Բաղդասարյան, Հանրապետական խմբակցություն
Ուլտիմատումների, շանտաժների, հայհոյանքների միջոցով քաղաքական որոշումներ չեն կայացվում: Մենք ընդունել ենք ժողովրդի հաղթանակը, համաձայն ենք հնչող քննադատությունների հետ, հաշվի ենք նստել ժողովրդական շարժման հետ: Մենք ընդունում ենք, որ ժողովրդական շարժումը կարող է սատարել որևէ թեկնածուի: Բայց Հանրապետական խմբակցությունը դեմ է քվեարկելու Նիկոլ Փաշինյանի վարչապետ դառնալու հարցին՝ փորձելով կասեցնել վտանգավոր ալիքը, որ կծնվի մեր երկրում:
Արա Բաբլոյան ԱԺ նախագահ, ՀՀԿ կուսակցություն, արտահերթ ելույթ
Բոլորիս ցանկությունն է, որ մենք միանշանակ պետք է անենք, տեղի ունենան սահուն և անցնցում: Քաղաքական ուժերի վերջին քննարկումների ժամանակ ի հայտ եկան երկրում առկա ինչպես դրական, այնպես էլ բացասական երևույթները: Միևնույն ժամանակ այն բոլոր քննադատությունները, որ հնչեցին նաև ՀՀԿ-ականների կողմից, վկայում են, որ առանց այդ թերությունները վերացնելու իրավիճակը բարելավել և երկրի առաջընթացն ապահովել: Փաստ է, որ այսօր գտնվում ենք քաղաքական ճգնաժամի մեջ և այն պետք է հանգուցալուծել խաղաղ և բոլորի համար ընդունելի ճանապարհով:
Պարոն Փաշինյան, երկխոսելու փոխարեն դուք ուզում եք ճնշել և պարտության մատնել խորհրդարանական մեծամասնությանը: Որպես հմուտ քաղաքական գործիչ, ինչպե՞ս եք պատկերացնում ձայներ ստանալ առանց երկխոսության: Իմ համոզմամբ, մենք պետք է շարունակենք առաջ գնալ քաղաքական բանակցությունների ճանապարհով՝ ուրվագծելով վաղվա օրը առանց ցունամիների ու ցնցումների:
First World War: Bloody conflict in oil-rich Baku
The Times, UK
First World War: Bloody conflict in oil-rich Baku
As London turned its attention to the Caucasus, fighting between Bolsheviks and Muslims plunged the city into chaos
by Michael Tillotson
Men working in the thick smoke of the Baku oilfields on December 1, 1918
In April 1918 the attention of the British cabinet and military high command turned again to the Caucasus. The Turks appeared to be preparing to invade that turbulent melting pot of Armenians, Muslims and their Russian overlords with the aim of capturing the Baku oilfields, which it was said had resources "enough to light and heat every home on earth".
Of equally troubling concern to ministers was that control of the region would, in theory at least, open the route through Persia – modern Iran – via Afghanistan to India, to where Lenin was known to have ambitions to carry the Bolshevik banner. The Caucasus had recently fallen under the tenuous control of the Baku Soviet, a shaky coalition of the city's residents presided over by the Armenian Stepan Shaumian, an adroit communist dedicated to the conversion of the region to the supposedly unifying new dogma propagated by Petrograd.
Although Shaumian's writ extended scarcely beyond the outskirts of Baku, in London's perception the city had become the centre of authority and must be denied to Turkey if the oilfields and way to India were to kept out of enemy hands.
Aside from the railway between Baku and Russia's previous administrative centre of Tiflis (now Tbilisi), overland communications were primitive and the best means of moving large bodies of troops was the Caspian Sea, lying like a plump reversed question mark to the east. Spanning 143,000 square miles, its coastlines lay in Russia to the north and east, Azerbaijan to the west and Persia to the south and southwest.
Baku, a well-developed cosmopolitan city, sits on a small peninsula on the Azerbaijani shore, with transport vessels plying from its port to others around the coast. At Hamadan, in neutral and compliant Persia, Major-General Lionel Dunsterville and a cadre of instructors intended to turn the Armenians, whose territory faced the border, into a military force capable of holding back the Turks. He waited impatiently for reinforcements from Baghdad, 300 miles away. These were essential if he was to have a force capable of fighting its way through to the port of Enzeli on the southern coast, from where Dunsterville planned to sail north to Baku, then utilise the railway for an advance on Tiflis. The mountainous territory between Hamadan and Enzeli was the haunt of tribesmen likely to massacre the 44-man cadre of instructors, unless it had a substantial escort.
Baku city lay quiet, but with an underlying tension because the Muslim majority resented the oilfield workers from neighbouring Armenia. Worrying news for the Muslims that the British government was providing funds and arms to the Armenians, ostensibly to build up an army against the threatening Turks, elicited support for the Muslims from a totally unexpected direction. Arrival of the advance guard of the former tsarist Muslim Savage Division by sea from Lankaran on the coast near the Azerbaijani border with Persia introduced confusion, then violence.
Officials of the Baku Soviet strode down to the harbour to demand the newcomers' intentions, only to be sent sprinting back to their headquarters by rifle fire. Bolshevik troops were summoned and eventually overcame and disarmed the relatively small number of aggressors, but then the rest of the Savage Division arrived, giving the Muslims the advantage of numbers. There were, however, Russian-manned naval vessels in the harbour whose crews joined the Bolsheviks. Barricades were thrown up, trenches dug and within hours the city was engulfed in fighting between the Russian Bolsheviks and the Muslims, who were soon getting the worst of it.
The wife of a British officer serving with the defunct military mission to the tsar's army, Ida Dewar Durie, watched the mayhem from her first-floor room in the Hotel d'Europe, where she and her companion lived on bread, cheese and Caspian caviar, because the hotel's food stocks had been looted by both sides. Makeshift hospitals for the many wounded were established and Mrs Dewar Durie noticed that most of the stretcher bearers were former Austrian or German prisoners-of-war set free by the Bolsheviks. The Muslim quarter of Baku was soon in flames and further resistance ended with the Bolsheviks and Armenians triumphant.
The Bolshevik leader Shaumian sent a dispatch to Lenin stating that 10,000 Muslims, including the Savage Division, had been soundly defeated and, embroidering his report – as victors are prone to do – added that the handful of Muslim survivors were now "rallying to the Bolshevik cause".
Factual and distorted rumours of the fighting and its outcome reached Dunsterville, who was still awaiting reinforcements at Hamadan. Before their arrival came changed instructions, a not infrequent military experience. Instead of arming and training the Armenians to fight the Turks, he was ordered to secure Baku and its strategic oilfields.
News of the massacre of the Muslims in Baku and the known hostility of the victorious Bolsheviks to the British, because they suspected they were being sent to dislodge them, gave him much to think about. Selected for his assignment because he was a Russian speaker, Dunsterville was a patient and painstaking man who kept a daily diary throughout the war. We shall hear of him again after he eventually sailed into Baku, not with the infantry division he had requested after receipt of his new orders from Baghdad, but one infantry battalion and a squadron of armoured cars. Command headquarters habitually regard requests for reinforcements as overstated.
Sargsyan’s resignation is the start of a process
Netgazeti, Georgia
April 24 2018
Sargsyan's resignation is the start of a process
by Mikayel Zolyan
Velvet revolution in Armenia: First impressions
[Armenian News note: the below is translated from Georgian]
What would seem unimaginable a month ago and unlikely a week ago has happened in Armenia. Resignation of Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan became inevitable during daytime on 23 April. Readers of Netgazeti may remember that the author of these words was quite sceptical about prospects for protests just a week ago.
Many thought back on 22 April that the protest movement was going to suffer a defeat. [MP] Nikol Pashinyan and other leaders of the protests were detained. It would seem at first glance that the movement was beheaded and the government was to proceed with targeted repressions until the movement found itself localised and suppressed.
However, events took quite a different turn. Pashinyan said at the 23 April rally that government representatives kept coming to him and offering various options for compromise. At the beginning, they offered that Sargsyan would resign in half a year, then in two months, and then in a week. Pashinyan gave the same answer to all these offers: He demanded that Sargsyan resign in two hours.
Finally, Pashinyan's demands were satisfied: Serzh Sargsyan published a statement, in which he said: "I was wrong and Nikol Pashinyan was right".
What happened? The problem is that the detainment of the protest leaders had a reverse effect. After the opposition supporters emerged from the first shock, something unprecedented started taking pace in the whole of Armenia. People took to the streets in the capital city [Yerevan] and remote villages. Something unimaginable happened in Yerevan in the evening: Two endless streams of citizens headed from various areas in the city to the central Republic Square.
When these two streams met, a most numerous rally during the protests assembled in the square.
The opposition said that 160,000 people attended it and the government spoke about a rally of 35,000, although it was clear that the mobilisation was unprecedented.
It became clear even to the government on the evening of 23 April that it would be necessary to use force to stop the protests, but this would lead to a high number of victims.
Given Serzh Sargsyan's reputation of being a cynical and cruel politician, many thought in Armenia that he would not surrender and would suppress the protests even at the expense of numerous victims.
At his talks with Nikol Pashinyan on the morning of 22 April, Sargsyan effectively openly threatened to repeat the events that took place on 1 March 2008, when 10 people died at a rally as a result of the use of force.
However, to use force, Sargsyan needed support from the political elite, which was weakening every second. At the same time, 24 April was drawing closer. Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day [24 April] was an additional factor of psychological pressure on Sargsyan.
Finally, Sargsyan, the chairman of the Armenian Chess Federation, realised that the game was lost and made a statement, which left even many of his opponents surprised due to its sincerity.
Why did this happen?
What happened is a result of the coincidence of several factors at the same time. Sargsyan's phenomenal unpopularity was one of them. It is difficult to find another politician in world history, who would lack popular support to such an extent, but would nevertheless try to extend his rule after the end of his term as president. What Sargsyan always succeeded in was that he used to deceive his opponents and probably it was due to this that he ceased to be rational.
Had Sargsyan agreed to appoint someone else as prime minister, remaining [in power] as "eminence grise", the country could have avoided protests or they would not have been so large. However, what Sargsyan probably feared more was that it was his companions, who could have removed him from power, but not people. Probably it was this that he meant when he said that he was wrong.
Another factor that made the protests successful was the tactic chosen by the opposition. During the days of the protests, I got the impression on many accounts that Pashinyan and his companions had read a book on revolutionary technologies and non-violent protests.
Of course, Pashinyan and his team also made mistakes, but as a whole, he presented himself as a certain combination of Vladimir Lenin and Mahatma Gandhi during the last days of the protests. On the one hand, they resorted to as much pressure as possible, depriving the government of the opportunity to take a breath, and on the other, they made protests non-violent, which did not enable the government to use force.
Despite provocations during the protests on the part of police and pro-government "titushki" [paid thugs, who worked closely with the police during protests in Ukraine against the regime of Viktor Yanukovych], the opposition effectively used no force. Many university students and young people participated in the protests and even school students stood there, which made the use of force psychologically difficult.
The position of external forces, in particular Russia, is the third and most unexpected factor. The position of Western countries was more or less predictable – appeals to resolve the situation peacefully, but Russia's position proved to be unexpected. We have become accustomed to the fact that as a rule, Russia takes such processes as a threat to its own influence and what is worst, perceives them as a threat to stability within Russia. However, Russia has not made similar statements this time and comments by [Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson] Maria Zakharova were conspicuously neutral and Russian TV channels did not speak about another "colour revolution", "Maydan", and the "cookies of the Department of State".
Such a reaction was so unexpected that a conspiracy theory emerged, saying that Moscow was behind the protests, which seems absolutely unimaginable.
In reality, Moscow presumably took into account its experience of Ukraine and refused to openly assume responsibility for the use of force by an unpopular politician. Moreover, Moscow presumably expected that as a result of all this, power would go to incumbent Acting Prime Minister Karen Karapetyan, who is believed to be a pro-Russian politician and a comparatively calm attitude to the protests is due to this.
It was presumably due to these reasons that Moscow decided to disregard the events in Armenia that may have their impact on protest movements in Russia proper as well as in other countries of the [Russian-led] Eurasian Union.
What may happen?
The opposition won a sweeping victory. However, as Nikol Pashinyan said at the 23 April rally, not everything ends with it. A few days earlier, Pashinyan published the following programme: 1. Serzh Sargsyan's resignation; 2. Formation of a provisional government led by a "popular candidate" [most likely implying Pashinyan proper or one of his companions] [square brackets as published]; 3. Early [parliamentary] elections with all measures taken to make them free and transparent.
The first point in the programme has already been achieved, but Pashinyan and his supporters will now have to struggle to implement the remaining points, which may prove to be more difficult than the struggle against Sargsyan, as it is difficult to say, how long it will be possible to maintain the "revolutionary" energy of the masses. At the same time, Karapetyan, who is more popular among people than Serzh Sargsyan, may enjoy support from Moscow, as said above.
Pashinyan does not yet have an experienced political team. However, the experience his companions have accumulated over the past three weeks should also be taken into account.
One way or another, everything now depends on Pashinyan's ability to transform street protests into constant political support.
I think it will not be an exaggeration to say that Pashinyan is the most popular politician in Armenia now. If he manages to "push back" Karapetyan and the Republican Party and to come to the head of the government, holding really transparent elections later, his party will win much more votes than his Yelk [Way out] bloc in 2017.
Of course, the Republican Party will do all it can to prevent this from happening, but this cannot be ruled out in case of street protests. Correspondingly, the Republican Party will have to make concessions, a rift will take place within the party, and some MPs will quit the Republican Party to side with Pashinyan.
The events in Armenia are still far from having the knot untied. Serzh Sargsyan's resignation is not the end to the process. It is the beginning of the process. However, the resignation is quite important as a fact. This is the first case in Armenian history, when a ruler had to resign because of popular protests. At the same time, Sargsyan did not use force, which can also be regarded as a precedent not only for the future of Armenia, but also for the rest of the post-Soviet countries.
At the same time, this is the first case in not only Armenia, but also in the whole post-Soviet area, when the leader of protests was not from either political or business elite.
[Former Georgian President] Mikheil Saakashvili, [who led protests in Georgia in 2003 and deposed President Eduard Shevardnadze] was from Shevardnadze's team and [former Georgian Prime Minister and founder of Georgia's ruling Georgian Dream party, Bidzina] Ivanishvili, [who defeated Saakashvili's party in 2012], is an oligarch. He [Pashinyan] is a former journalist turned opposition politician. It is going to be quite important, if he manages to come to power.
The main achievement for Armenian citizens is that they managed to stop what many in Armenia called "Turkmenisation" and "sultanate", i.e. the creation of Serzh Sargsyan's personal regime for an indefinite time. No matter how events may unfold, we can be sure that Armenia is not facing the prospect of becoming a "sultanate" in the near future.
Rights group: Istanbul police break up memorial for Armenian killings
Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Germany Tuesday 2:31 PM EST Rights group: Istanbul police break up memorial for Armenian killings Istanbul DPA POLITICS Turkey history Armenia Rights group: Istanbul police break up memorial for Armenian killings Istanbul Police in Istanbul broke up a memorial on Tuesday commemorating the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I, a leading human rights group said. Police objected to the terms "genocide" and "massacre," which were employed by speakers at the event, according to the Turkish Human Rights Association (IHD). Armenians regard the killings as genocide and have demanded recognition from Turkey, which denies the term, saying there were many deaths on all sides during the brutal war. April 24, the day deportations of Armenian intellectuals began in Istanbul in 1915, is marked as a memorial day. In recent years, rallies and marches have been held in Istanbul. "Police did not allow the memorial to take place and briefly detained three of our members for holding placards that included banned words," an IHD spokesperson told dpa. The Istanbul police department was not immediately available to comment. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan released a written statement saying Turkey continues to "share the pain" and "remember the Ottoman Armenians who lost their lives during the fierce and harsh conditions of the First World War." A number of nations around the world, including Germany, France and the Netherlands, have recognized the killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as "genocide."
Sen. Reed Issues Statement on 103rd Anniversary of Armenian Genocide
Targeted News Service Tuesday 8:00 AM EST Sen. Reed Issues Statement on 103rd Anniversary of Armenian Genocide WASHINGTON Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, issued the following statement, which was published in the Congressional Record on April 23, on the 103rd anniversary of the Armenian genocide: Mr. President, this week we solemnly observe the 103rd anniversary of the Armenian genocide. Over a century ago, one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century began when the Young Turk leaders of the Ottoman Empire executed more than 200 prominent Armenians. What followed was an 8-year systematic campaign of oppression and massacre. By 1923, an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were killed, and over a half a million survivors were exiled. These atrocities affected the lives of every Armenian living in Asia Minor and, indeed, across the globe. The U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire during this dark time, Henry Morgenthau, Sr., unsuccessfully pleaded with President Wilson to take action and later remembered the events of the genocide, saying, "I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The great massacres and persecutions of the past seem almost insignificant when compared to the sufferings of the Armenian race in 1915." Clearly, the suffering of the Armenian people must never be forgotten. The survivors of the Armenian genocide, however, persevered due to their unbreakable spirit and steadfast resolve and went on to greatly contribute to the lands in which they found new homes and communities, including the United States. That is why we not only commemorate this grave tragedy each year, but we also take this moment to celebrate the traditions, the contributions, as well as the bright future of the Armenian people. Indeed, my home State of Rhode Island continues to be enriched by our strong and vibrant Armenian-American community. This genocide has been denied for far too long. To honor the memory of this tragedy, I have joined with several of my colleagues on resolutions over the years to encourage the U.S. to officially recognize the Armenian genocide. As we remember the past, we remain committed to forging a brighter future. We must continue to guard against hatred and oppression so that we can prevent such crimes against humanity. As ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I remain committed to supporting assistance to Armenia to strengthen security, promote economic growth, and foster democratic reforms and development. We must find a way to come together to recognize the truth of what happened and to provide unwavering support and assistance to those facing persecution today.
Artsakh military releases footage showing Azerbaijani mobilization of manpower, equipment (video)
Categories
Artsakh
Official
Region
The defense ministry of Artsakh has released footage showing Azerbaijani manpower and military equipment movements and accumulations in the line of contact.
The defense ministry of Artsakh also addressed a disinformation which was spread by the Azerbaijani defense ministry. The Azeri defense ministry had claimed that an earlier statement of the defense ministry of Artsakh on heavy ceasefire violations by Azerbaijan is false.
Artsakh’s defense ministry said the disinformation and propaganda style of Azerbaijan was fully predictable and is typical of Baku’s military-political strategy.
The defense ministry of Artsakh debunked the accusations and released a video proving that Azerbaijani forces are indeed mobilizing equipment and manpower in the line of contact.