Author: Takmazian

COMMISSION ON ARMENIA’S MILITARY DOCTRINE ELABORATION HOLDS FINAL SITTING

PanARMENIAN.Net
03.09.2007 18:27 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Today the commission on elaboration of the military
doctrine of the Republic of Armenia held a resulting sitting presided
by RA Defense Minister Mikael Harutyunyan.

As RA Defense Minister’s Spokesman, Colonel Seyran Shahsuvaryan told
PanARMENIAN.Net, the sitting participants discussed the work carried
out and referred to the remarks and proposals coordinated with the
commission members. They also compiled the list of future events and
issued orders.

TURKISH INTELLECTUAL THINKS THAT THE ARMENIAN ISSUE WILL BE A PRIORITY FOR THE NEW TURKISH GOVERNMENT

arminfo
2007-09-03 18:41:00

Arminfo. The Armenian issue will be a priority for the new government
because it’s blocking Turkey’s international relations, Soli Ozel,
a senior lecturer in international relations and political science
at Istanbul Bilgi University, a columnist for the daily Sabah said
in an interview with the Turkish newspaper Zaman., – Ozel thinks.

Touching on the attempts of the Turkish authorities to stop the process
of the Armenian genocide recognition by US congress, he said that
they utterly and miserably failed., – the Turkish inttelctual said.

Moreover, touching on the prospect of the border opening, Ozel said
in the context of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict if Turkey were to
open the border with Armenia, it would have much more influence on
Armenia than it has today.

18 NEW "LIAZ" TROLLEYBUSES IMPORTED FROM VOLGOGRAD TO FOLLOW 4 ROUTES IN YEREVAN

Noyan Tapan
Sep 3, 2007

YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 3, NOYAN TAPAN. The new LIAZ trolleybuses (made
in 2007) imported from the Russian city of Volgograd into Yerevan
will follow four routes. The mayor of Yerevan Yervand Zakharian told
reporters on August 31 that one of these 18 trollyebuses with the load
of 116 passengers has a special movable platform allowing disabled
persons in wheelchairs to get on the trolleybus: such a trollyebus
will be used in Yerevan for the first time.

600 million drams (about 1.7 mln USD) has been allocated from the
RA state budget for purchase of these trolleybuses. The mayor said
that it is envisaged to import about 20 trolleybuses every year,
bringing their number to 150 in the next 3-4 years. The cable network
has been in parts repaired over the last 3-4 years and is currently
in a good state.

It was mentioned that a Renault-SC10 bus (number plate 318 LS 67) of
Avtobus CJSC under the jurisdiction of the Yerevan mayor’s office has
been re-equipped for servicing disabled passengers and transferred
gratis to the charitable NGO of Pyunik union of the disabled of
Armenia.

Pentagon `three-day blitz’ plan for Iran
Sarah Baxter, Washington

The Sunday Times
September 2, 2007

THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200
targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military
capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon
Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for `
pinprick strikes’ against Iran’s nuclear facilities. `They’re about
taking out the entire Iranian military,’ he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a
conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the
US military had concluded: `Whether you go for pinprick strikes or
all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the
same.’ It was, he added, a `very legitimate strategic calculus’.

President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week,
accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East `under the shadow of a
nuclear holocaust’. He warned that the US and its allies would confront
Iran `before it is too late’.

One Washington source said the `temperature was rising’ inside the
administration. Bush was `sending a message to a number of audiences’,
he said � to the Iranians and to members of the United Nations security
council who are trying to weaken a tough third resolution on sanctions
against Iran for flouting a UN ban on uranium enrichment.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last week reported `
significant’ cooperation with Iran over its nuclear programme and said
that uranium enrichment had slowed. Tehran has promised to answer most
questions from the agency by November, but Washington fears it is
stalling to prevent further sanctions. Iran continues to maintain it is
merely developing civilian nuclear power.

Bush is committed for now to the diplomatic route but thinks Iran is
moving towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to one well placed
source, Washington believes it would be prudent to use rapid,
overwhelming force, should military action become necessary.

Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear
weapons, has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be
ready to attack if the Americans back down.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for the National Council of Resistance
of Iran, which uncovered the existence of Iran’s uranium enrichment
plant at Natanz, said the IAEA was being strung along. `A number of
nuclear sites have not even been visited by the IAEA,’ he said. `They’re
giving a clean bill of health to a regime that is known to have
practised deception.’

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, irritated the Bush
administration last week by vowing to fill a `power vacuum’ in Iraq. But
Washington believes Iran is already fighting a proxy war with the
Americans in Iraq.

The Institute for the Study of War last week released a report by
Kimberly Kagan that explicitly uses the term `proxy war’ and claims that
with the Sunni insurgency and Al-Qaeda in Iraq `increasingly under
control’, Iranian intervention is the `next major problem the coalition
must tackle’.

Bush noted that the number of attacks on US bases and troops by
Iranian-supplied munitions had increased in recent months � `despite
pledges by Iran to help stabilise the security situation in Iraq’.

It explains, in part, his lack of faith in diplomacy with the Iranians.
But Debat believes the Pentagon’s plans for military action involve the
use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would
seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq.

A TASTE OF CHINA IN KARABAKH
By Lusine Musaelian in Vank, Nagorny Karabakh

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
Aug 31 2007

Three Chinese cooks enliven life in a small Karabakhi village.

Local people in Karabakh have given them names that are easier to
memorise: Juan Jui San turned into Jivan, Juan Go became Gurgen,
and Juan Kai Ti was called Anna.

The three Chinese cooks are far from home. They have settled in
the remote territory in the South Caucasus and not even in the
Karabakhi capital Stepanakert but in the northern village of Vank
in the Martakert district. And surprisingly, they not only speak the
Karabakh Armenian dialect, but have a marked Martakert accent too.

Jivan, 28, and Gurgen and Anna, both 25, work in a Chinese restaurant
at the Eklektika Hotel in Vank.

Karabakh’s only Chinese residents, they certainly stand out.

According to the official census conducted in 2005, the internationally
unrecognised Nagorny Karabakh republic has 137,737 inhabitants of
whom Armenians make up 99.7 of the population.

The Chinese cooks came to Karabakh on the invitation of the hotel
owner, Russian-based businessman and patron Levon Hairapetian who was
born in Vank. Hairapetian found them through a friend, an Armenian
businessman living in China. The three came on a year’s contract but
hope to extend their stay in Karabakh.

The Chinese say they had no idea how they would communicate when
they arrived

"But within three months we started talking Karabakhi little by
little," said Gurgen in the local language.

Karabakh Armenian is very different from the Armenian language spoken
in Armenia. The three talk with difficulty but are able to get by in
everyday conversation.

Vank, which is also home to the famous medieval church of Gandzasar,
is the focus of a regeneration project, mainly thanks to the efforts
of Hairapetian and is already far more prosperous than other rural
communities in Karabakh. Although it suffered badly in the 1991-4 war,
there are very few traces of battle damage left.

A construction boom is underway with hotels, recreation centres,
a new school and even a zoo being built. The only disco, open-air
cinema and public swimming pool in Karabakh are all located in Vank.

There is even a local radio station called Radio Vank.

The village hosts what has now become a celebrated annual event, a
donkey race, whose high-profile attendees have included Karabakh-born
Armenian president Robert Kocharian.

The Karabakhis have been nicknamed "donkeys" because of their
reputation for stubbornness. The locals take pride in the stereotype
and there are several statues of donkeys in the village.

This diversity makes it less surprising that Vank is also home to a
Chinese restaurant staffed by three Chinese expatriates.

Gurgen reveals to IWPR that he plans to stay because he has found the
love of his life here, a 10th-grade high school student from Vank,
whose name he declines to reveal in case her parents learn about
their love affair which is still a secret. He says he dreams of
getting married and staying in Karabakh.

Jivan and Anna are husband and wife, who have left their three-year-old
son behind in Guangxi. Jivan says he likes Vank because the locals
want to see more children born, not less, unlike his homeland and he
and his wife hope to have more children. Every time a baby is born
in Vank, Hairapetian presents the family with 500 US dollars.

"It’s a pity China is not like that – they prohibit having more than
one child there," he said.

Anna is struck by the way within a short time everyone in the village
knew her and said hello. "You’re one of a million in China; even your
neighbour does not know you by sight," she said.

The trio have adapted well. They now drink the famous local tutovka
mulberry vodka and know how to propose toasts and play backgammon.

They did not want to talk about politics and seemed to know little
about the unresolved Nagorny Karabakh conflict.

Some of the locals are delighted that the three foreigners are bringing
a taste of another world to remote Karabakh.

Svetlana Lazarian, who has become a close friend of the Chinese,
say that the villagers have grown fond of them and that they are
confounding expectations.

"Once Jivan went to a market in Stepanakert to buy some food," she
said with a laugh. "The shop assistant thought he was a tourist,
wrote the total price, 6,700 Armenian drams on a piece of paper and
handed it to Jivan. Jivan looked at the paper and read out loud the
sum in Armenian. That scared the shop assistant a lot – a Chinese
speaking in Karabakh Armenian!"

Tourists at the hotel witnessed our conversation and were interested
in hearing the Chinese speak the Karabakh Armenian dialect. They have
become minor celebrities for that reason.

"But we have not come to Vank to amuse people, we’ve come to establish
Chinese cuisine here. Of course, sometimes we are not able to find
the food here," said Jivan, registering a small complaint about living
in such a far-away spot.

Lusine Musaelian is a correspondent for Demo newspaper in Nagorny
Karabakh and a member of IWPR’s EU-funded Cross Caucasus Journalism
Network project.

THOMAS HAMMERBERG : AZERBAIJAN IS EXPECTED TO BE A MODEL FOR HUMAN RIGHTS FOR THE REST OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE UNITED NATIONS

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Aug 30 2007

France, Strasbourg / corr Trend A.Maharramli / Trend’s interview with
Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe, Thomas Hammerberg.

Question: You are scheduled to visit Baku from 3 to 8 September. What
are you going to discuss during your visit to Baku and what issues
are on the agenda?

Answer: This is a major mission that we do every five to six years
involving a country, in order to assess the overall situation when
it comes to human rights, so we are dealing with a number of issues
and the problems, of course. We will see the President and his
Ministers, the legal judges, the leading judges, the representatives
of non-government societies, and the media which is a part of a
program picture. We will also travel a bit outside of Baku in order
to gain better insight of the country’s conditions outside of the
capital city. We are going to visit prisons and other institutions
where human rights are an issue. This visit is to gain a whole and
overall picture. The results will be published in a report which we
will submit to the Committee of Ministers.

Question: How do you estimate the situation on human rights in
Azerbaijan compared to last year and how could the situation change
next year?

Answer: I see. Yes. I was there in May. Azerbaijan was the first
country I visited after I taking up this office. But that was a
short visit, I saw someone among the leading ministers and the
President and also I talked with the non-governmental institutions
and civil societies. But this was my first series of visits and it
was too short. And it will be very interesting for me to assess what
changes there have been since last year. I notice that the Azerbaijani
Government and parliamentarians adopted a national plan of actions for
implementation of human rights in December. So I will be interested
to see what steps have been taken in order to implement that. I also
notice that Azerbaijan is now a member of the United Nations Human
Rights Council, which of course means that as a member of that United
Nations body, Azerbaijan is expected to be a model for human rights
for the rest of the member states of the United Nations.

Question: During your visit to Azerbaijan you will present a report
on the observation of human rights in Azerbaijan, which will also be
presented to the CE Ministerial Committee. What milestones will you
highlight in this report?

Answer: It depends a bit on what I do see and what is said in the
talks that we had, but we will definitely talk about the situation
of the internally displaced persons and their situation after the
conflict with Armenia. We will definitely talk about the situation
with media and freedom of expression and freedom of journalism in the
country. This will be compared with our preliminary reports and our
programs in this field. We will look at the conditions in prisons. I
did actually visit prisons last time I was there in May last year. We
have some views about the standards of the detention conditions. We
will also discuss the functioning of the judicial system in courts
and what can be done in order to secure that the court system is fair
and protects the rights of people, and individuals. So there are a
number of issues that we are prepared to discuss. But I don’t want
to say anything about the conclusions before I hear the answers.

Question: Recently, over twenty Azerbaijani journalists have appealed
to western countries for political asylum. How do you view the
situation of the Azerbaijani media?

Answer: We have reports about these problems. Both when it comes to
treatment of individual journalists and also other arrangements. So
this will definitely be another key task to discuss. We believe that
freedom of media is a human right in itself. But also when the media
cannot operate freely that also harms the protection of other rights
within society.

Question: Indeed, your report will also deal with the court system
of Azerbaijan. In the past reforms have been carried out to improve
the court system in the country. What needs more attention in the
country’s legal system?

Answer: That we will discuss. This is a major issue. We believe that
an independent system of the courts is absolutely crucial for the
protection of the human rights and how judicial persons should not be
subject to any pressure, or economical and political circumstances
in the country, but should be respected as a fully independent. So
we will discuss this matter of course.

Question: Do you any plans to become familiar with the state of prisons
and isolation cells during your visit? Do you have any information
on the situation of prisons in Azerbaijan?

Answer: Well I have my own preliminary impression from my last visit in
May 2006. But we have also, within the Council of Europe, a Committee
for the Prevention of Torture, which sends out delegations to various
countries including Azerbaijan to observe the situation.

So I believe that we have the information already now. But we will
definitely want to look for ourselves to see if there have been
improvements or not.

RECOGNIZE OR REJECT INDEPENDENCE?

KarabakhOpen
30-08-2007 14:26:51

Raffi Hovannisian, chair of the Armenian opposition Heritage
party, stated his party proposed the bill on the recognition of
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

It was unexpected for many, although hardly anyone denies the absurdity
of the situation: Armenia demands that the international organizations
recognize Karabakh but it has not recognized yet. Nevertheless,
the reaction of the Armenian politicians toward Raffi Hovannisian’s
decision was more negative than positive. At least no political party
said to support the bill. In addition, some have criticized it.

Mher Shahgeldyan, deputy leader of the Orinats Yerkir Party, the second
opposition party of the Armenian parliament, said: "We are on the
track for democracy therefore it is too early to adopt such a bill."

Murad Petrosyan, a Karabakh-based analyst, host of the "Facts,
Events, Reflections" TV program on the Public Television of Artsakh,
said at the moment the recognition of NKR by Armenia would look like
a challenge. The challenge would arouse a counteraction. Meanwhile,
Armenia and Karabakh are unable to resist to the negative reaction
of the international community.

The silence of the other political forces can be explained. The text
of the bill is such that the refusal to adopt it would be perceived
by the society as an anti-national move. However, the adoption should
be motivated and calculated thoroughly to become possible. Therefore,
the Armenian politicians, even the ones who are used to display a
clear-cut stance on all the issues appear embarrassed. After all,
the presidential election is coming up, and it would not be desirable
to be accused of reluctance to recognize NKR.

TALKING HISTORY: THE CHINESE CLASSICS AND FOREIGN POLICY
by Nikolas K. Gvosdev

The National Interest Online, DC
5306
Aug 28 2007

In the aftermath of the Bishkek summit of the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization, some Western observers have raised concerns about
a China more prepared to operate "out of area" and have wondered
about the type of global order China seeks. Some have wondered if
Beijing¡¯s plans for the 21st century reflect a break with past
Chinese traditions. Perhaps an examination of some of China¡¯s
classical historical texts is in order.

First, even a casual perusal of some of the Chinese classics indicates
that our Western notion of what constitutes a historically Chinese
"sphere of influence" (essentially limited to East Asia) is somewhat
deficient. This becomes clear when considering what is to be found in
the entries grouped under the rubric of "Traditions regarding Western
Countries". [NOTE: My thanks to Paul Halsall of Fordham University
and his Asia History Sourcebook, from which the following excerpts
are taken.]

For instance, in the 123rd chapter of the Shiji of Sima Qian, we read
of the first embassy sent by the Chinese to the Parthians (the nation
then in control of what we today would consider to be Iran) in 91 BC,
following the campaigns undertaken under the orders of Emperor Wudi in
Central Asia. A Parthian ruler, probably Mithradates II (123-88 BC),
sent a return embassy to "to come and see the extent and greatness
of the Han Empire."

The H¨°u H¨¤nsh¨± (The Book of the Later Han), contained the notes
and observations of the famous General Ban Chao, who campaigned in
what is now Uzbekistan, reached the shores of the Caspian Sea, and
established outposts of the Chinese army only a few days march from
the Parthian capital of Ctesiphon, a city on the Tigris in the heart
of present-day Iraq. He also sent an emissary to treat with the Roman
Emperor Nerva under Gan Ying (who turned back before reaching Italy).

The Chinese presence in the region caused one of the kings of Armenia
to send tribute to China, and the 86th chapter of the Book of the
Later Han records that the Emperor An Di made an Armenian potentate
a daduwei, a "great commander in chief" of the empire, in essence,
recognizing him as a vassal.

In the Summer 2005 issue of The National Interest, Ambassador Robert
Blackwillnoted, "Too often we do not know our history" when touching
upon India¡¯s "civilizational ties" to the Greater Middle East. The
same might be said of China.

And in ancient China¡¯s relationship with the other superpower of
its day, the Roman Empire, we might gain some insight into the type
of multipolar world order Beijing has in mind for the future.

What is striking from the Chinese classics is the emphasis on the
Roman Empire as "another China"¡ªan equal state on the opposite side
of the world creating a balance for the global order. By the first
century, enough "Westerners" had made their way to China so that
differences in physiognomy could be registered, and yet the Hou Hanshu,
in describing the Romans with approval for the type of empire they
had created, had this to say: "The inhabitants of that country are
tall and well-proportioned, somewhat like the Han, whence they are
called Da Qin." Da Qin¡ª"Great Qin"¡ªis a reference to the founding
dynasty of China, and reflects the opinion that on "either side of
the world" are to be found two similar peoples, two similar states,
even to the point of suggesting that the Romans somehow "resembled"
the peoples of the Chinese empire in appearance.

In the Weil¨¹e of Yu Huan, written in the early third century, an
even more revealing passage occurs, when Yu says that the Romans call
their realm "another Middle Kingdom (Zhongguo)"¡ªperhaps drawing upon
the Roman notion of their empire as the "circle of lands" around the
"Middle Sea" or a reference to the Greek concept of the Roman realm
as the oikumene, the civilized world.

Indeed, in these classical texts, one gets a sense of a global order
defined by two "Middle Kingdoms", each with their own set of vassal
states and subordinate realms, linked together by a series of smaller
independent powers (such as the Parthians or the Gupta kingdom in
India) that facilitated contact between the two "Qins". I found an
echo of these ancient sentiments in recent comments by a former Chinese
ambassador to Germanywho opined that the way forward in international
affairs is for leading states, each reflecting their own particular
history and culture, each influential in their own regions of the
world as well as on the global scene, to foster dialogue to find
common solutions.

It is very true that most modern Chinese foreign policymakers are not
read in their classics, just as few members of the State Department
can be said to be well-versed in Thucydides, Polybius or Herodotus.

But our "civilizational" heritage does help to shape attitudes
and worldviews. Looking at China¡¯s past can help provide some
understanding about the type of future they hope to create.

Nikolas K. Gvosdev is editor of The National Interest.

–Boundary_(ID_xFT+btHRibc/iZLF0ahMOQ)- –

Counte rPunch
August 27 2007

Abe Foxman’s Genocide Denial Roadshow, Part 2

ADL’s Foxman’s Forges Impossible Alliance of Armenians, Turks and
Boston-Area Jews

By JOHN V. WALSH

Last week CounterPunch was the only national outlet, to the best of
our knowledge, to report the disturbances caused in the Boston suburb
of Watertown over denial of the Armenian genocide by the national
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and its director, Abe Foxman. The
brouhaha was set off by an investigation into Watertown’s
participation in "No Place for Hate," an "anti-bigotry" program of
uncertain origin. Mirabile dictu, the program turned out to be
sponsored by the national ADL which denies that the massacre of 1.5
million Armenians at the hands of the Turks from 1915 to 1923 amounted
to a genocide. This was quite disconcerting to the town mothers and
fathers since Watertown boasts an Armenian-American population in
excess of 8000. The town council met to consider the program and the
local director of ADL, one Andrew Tarsey, showed up to implore them
not to withdraw from the program. Met with boos and hisses by the duly
assembled Watertown citizenry, Tarsey beat a hasty retreat from the
Council chambers. The Watertown mothers and fathers then unanimously
voted to drop the ADL program.

The next day Tarsey, now in full rout, reversed his position, labeling
the killing of 1.5 million Armenians a genocide after all. Problem is
that this local ADL position contradicts the position of national ADL
headed by Abe Foxman, which persists in denying the Armenian genocide.
Foxman’s solution – fire local ADL leader Tarsey. And for good
measure, he labeled the Watertown position as "bigoted," thus playing
the "race card." Obviously the Watertownians must be anti-Semites, a
charge Foxman cannot resist, if they will not sponsor an ADL program.
However, in a challenge to Foxman, the local ADL and Jewish
establishment, seeing their credibility slip sliding away here in the
Athens of America, decided to affirm the Armenian genocide.

But the House of Reps. in US Congress has a resolution pending with
227 co-sponsors (a clear majority) recognizing the Armenian genocide,
much to the consternation of Turkey, an ally of Israel’s and also an
avid buyer of Israeli arms and an ally of the U.S. So what was Foxman
to do? Like Solomon, Foxman opted for a split decision, but unlike
Solomon, Foxman has tried to execute it. He said in Boston that he has
reversed his decision and the ADL now considers the Armenian massacre
"tantamount to genocide." ("Tantamount"?) But in Washington national
ADL will continue to oppose the Congressional resolution, recognizing
the Armenian genocide. So in Boston the massacre of Armenians is
genocide but in Washington it is not. What the status will be in NYC
or Baltimore, Foxman has yet to decide.

The Armenians, both locally and nationally, will have none of this.
They want the ADL to support the Congressional resolution recognizing
the Armenian genocide or else stand accused as genocide deniers. So
now both the Armenians and the local Boston ADL are at odds with
Foxman and national ADL.

Enter the Turks. They too have denounced Foxman for admitting genocide
in Boston even if he has not done so in Washington. And they are angry
about it. Foxman laid his original genocide denial at the feet of the
Turks, saying he feared for the safety of Jewish Turks if he crossed
the Turks. Friday the Turkish Foreign Ministry responded, "The Jewish
community in Turkey is part of our society, and its members do not
have any reason to worry." Clearly the Turks do not like Foxman’s
accusations of anti-Semitism, any more than the Watertownians did. The
Turks then one-upped Foxman, claiming that his Boston recognition of
the Armenian genocide denies the special nature of the Holocaust. "We
consider the statement of the ADL as an injustice to the unique
character of the Holocaust, as well as to the memories of its
victims," the Turkish Foreign Ministry in Washington said in a
statement. "We expect it to be rectified." There you have it, Abe
Foxman, Holocaust denier! So Foxman now has accomplished what has
eluded diplomats for nearly a century, bringing Armenians and Turks
together – in this case in opposition to national ADL. And he has even
brought down a Turkish charge against his own proper respect for the
Holocaust!

Foxman of course is little more than an intellectual bully, sliming
with charges of anti-Semitism whomever dares challenge the policies of
Isreal. But his defamatory, anti-defamation league is in trouble.
Foxman’s actions now put the fabled and hitherto invincible Isreali
Lobby on the line. The Turks certainly must have thought that the
Lobby could "deliver" Congress on genocide denial, and Foxman’s ADL is
a key component of that Lobby. The Turks have already complained to
Israel about the ADL’s Boston-Washington split decision. This is very
important to them, having hired both Dick Gephardt, former House
Majority Leader and Bob Livingston (Remember him?) former Speaker of
the House at considerable cost to get Congress on their side. So the
battle lines are drawn. CounterPunch will keep you posted.

John V. Walsh can be reached at [email protected].

POWER CANDIDATE WON AT EXTRA ELECTION TO PARLIAMENT IN 15TH DISTRICT

arminfo
2007-08-27 09:11:00

According to the preliminary data of the district election committee,
a candidate from the Republican party of Armenia Khachik Manukyan
won at yesterday’s extra election to the Armenian Parliament in the
15th district.

As spokeswoman of RA CEC Tatevik Ohanyan told ArmInfo, 36394 people
out of 60138 came to the polling stations. Thus, attendance at extra
election made up 60,5%. Total of 16121 people voted for K. Manukyan. He
is followed by non-party candidate, supported by ‘Prosperous Armenia’
party, Mayor of Talin town Mnatsakan Mnatsakanyan, who gathered 10067
votes, a representative of ARF Dashnaktsutiun Gourgen Shahinyan – 7248
votes. Leader of the oppositional ‘Heritage’ party Raffi Hovanissian
took the fourth place, having gathered 1120 votes. He is followed by
independent candidates Emin Karapetyan (518 votes) and Vahagn Petrosyan
(96 votes).