Proposal for a petition regarding the recently announced Protocols‏

Dear Friend,

You are aware of the Protocols, I am sure. The implications are deleterious to our people. On previous occasions you have initiated, or participated and/or circulated petitions that deal with significant issues related to our people. The most recent were:

Open Letter to His Excellency Serzh Sargsyan, President of Republic of Armenia http://www.keghart.com/node/297 and
We Condemn the Turkish-Armenian Agreement http://keghart.com/node/420 http://www.keghart.com/node/426

This time it is not any different. Our people is facing a greater challenge. I would invite those who have not had a chance yet to read Switzerland-Armenia Association Position Paper at http://www.keghart.com/node/630 to familiarize themselves with the grave implications of the protocols.

To this end a petition may be circulated as follows:

We, the signatories, are in agreement with establishing neighbourly International Relations between Armenia and Turkey. However, we strongly oppose the conditions outlined in the Protocols of 31 August 2009 that

1. Include provisions for a commission of historians, thus questioning the veracity of the Genocide of the Armenians,
2. Exclude the principle of self-determination and hence jeopardize the future of Nagorno Karabagh,
3. Recognize only the principle of territorial integrity, and hence effectively legitimize the occupation of Western Armenia.

I think a petition besides expressing an opinion should offer a plan of action to neutralize the negative aspects. There are several ideas that are floating. I'll summarize the most reasonable ones:

1. Ask the parliament not to ratify; however, with the present composition, it is highly likely that the Parliament may ratify. In the unlikely event that the Armenian parliament does not ratify coupled with highly unlikely Turkish parliament ratifying, then Armenia will attract the wrath of the western governments with all their mighty propaganda machine.

2. Call for a referendum in Armenia: provided it is freely carried. Again, it is questionable, because the government seems to be determined to go ahead, hence there is no guarantee that it will not be rigged.

3. Call for demonstrations: that I think should come from Armenia and not the Diaspora, although the Diaspora may organize its own. A friend has suggested

a Pan-Armenian Demonstration in Sèvres, France. Our compatriots in Europe work well with each other and they are capable of mobilizing people. It would be a very powerful symbolic slap in the face of all who concocted this shameful protocols.

If you are in agreement with being an initiator of such a petition please provide (1)your full first and last name without abbreviations, (2) degree or occupation (3) and the country you reside in. Suggestions, remarks, criticisms are welcome. Following a period of 48 hours a pre-final draft will be drawn for the approval of those who are in agreement to publish such a petition.

Respectfully,

Dikran Abrahamian BA, MD, Ontario, Canada

NB

Below are the names of people who will receive a copy of this message. They all appear under the relevant petitions mentioned above in Keghart.com. Hence, no violation of privacy is incurred. However, your e-mails are not displayed.

Avedis Bedrossian; Ara Manoogian; John Avedian; Hagop Mardirossian; Levon Ishag; Garo Ohannesyan; Garin Ohannesyan; Eugenie Tcharlassian; Isabelle Kortian;
Nadin Ohannesyan; Viktor A. Badalian; Vartkes Nicolian; Dikran Abrahamian; Leo (Levon) Manuelian; Harutyun Vosganyan; Gerard Paraghamian; Davit Zargarian;
Hagop Sevakian; Lina Davidian; Harut Der Tavitian; Gevork Aydinyan; Shavarsh Manougian; Yeghish Kazandjian; Jirair Tutunjian; Varvara Gasparyan; Sirvart Garabedian;
Ara Kahramanian; Armen Gakavian; Berj Gueyikian; Aleksandr Burnazyan; Andre Hovhannesyan; Lena Tchakmakian; Zareh Tchelikdjian; Vatche Aslanian;

Vasken Deukmedjian; Ishkhan Babajanian; Levon Hakopjan; Armen Topouzian; Meguerdich Torossian; Maria Cristina Koutoudjian; Taniel Tanielian; Charles Paskerian;

Dikran Abajian; Victor Mamourian; Vahram Jihanian; Antranig Bedrossian; Edmond Beglarian; Bagrad Nazarian; TorosYeranjian; Haig Kupelian; Madlen Avetyan
Janis Bazian; Talar Hagopian; Serboohi Amirkhanian; Vasken Gaboydian; GaroTashdjian; Gerard Paraghamian; Edward Emmian; Zareh A; John Karasarkissian;
Ara Gregorian; Helen Samourian; Harut DerTavitian; Sylvie Balian; Vehanoush Mardirossian; Michael Kolton; Varoujan Boghossian; Simon & Piatrice Shekerjian;
Maria Hagopian; Nora Karahagopian; Lita Donelian; Varant Alexandrian; Svetlana Sharoyan; Alvard Antonyan; Sofik Galstyan; Sona Mardanyan; Yelena Sharoyan;
Aleksandr Burnazyan; Tamar Nigolian; Arevik Abaghyan; Janet Ghassemian; Vardan Tserunyan; Mari Barseghyan-Khanjyan; Anahit Tonoyan; Sevan Davtyan;

Talin Giragosian; Avetisyan Lusine; Alice Momjian-Ravary; Setrak Kassabian; Vik Momjian; Vicken Arabian; Avanes Giragosian; Vahagn Nazarian; Marine Vahradyan;
Gayane Badalyan; Marina Boulboulian; Wayne Berberian; Varto Hairanian; Sergey Hovhannisyan; Suzie Markarian; Dickran Torossian; Herosoohi Vesmadian;
Anna Aghakhanyan; Grigor Chubaryan; Lily Ordoubeigian; Suzy Sarafian; Mary Arevian; Noyem Fereshetyan; Garri Nahapetyan;Flora Guiragossian;
Garen Mirzoyan; Vartkes Nicolian; Olga Agayan; Artur Oganesyan; Aramies Mirzakhanian; Ruben Araqelyan; Karen Sargsyan; José Sarukhán;

Rev. Father Serop Azarian; Avedis Diban; Ara Kherlopian; Nazareth Davidian; Ara Manoogian; Artak Movsesyan; Arshak Bagdasarian; Vartan Vartanian;

Maro Badiguian-Shirvanian; Haikas Bedrossian; Arlet Allahverdi; Armen Attarian; Bruce Tasker; Arpi Hocacanyan; Antranig Chaderjian; Armen Hirant;
Isabelle Kortian; Levon Manuelian; L. Davidian; Haig Khatchadourian; Haig Misakyan; Haig Baltadjian; Maro Manavian; Minas Kojayan; Harout Der Tavitian;
Berge Minassian; S. Balian; Sebouh Boyajian; Van Balabanian; Viken L. Attarian; V. A. Badalian; Aram Adamyan; Ardavast Avakian; Arsine Attarian;

Dennis R. Papazian; Edgar Manukian; Hasmig Kurdian; Hratch Tourikian; Kate Tairyan; Kevin McGill; Rita Charchyan; Ruth Cooper; Shirley Fersch;

Unus Ali; Vigen Ghazarian; Virginia Misakyan; Vrejouhy Atikian; Anne Abrahamian; Ara Nahabedian; Aram S. Hanissian; Armen Kharazian; Ari Armen;

Edward Sarafian; Felicia Waldman; Hagop Kazarian; Harut Der-Tavitian; Hmayak Arazian; Houry Ellezian; Jack Kafesdjian; John Kostanian;

John J. Manoukian; Karen Hakobyan; Karine Avedissian; Lena Karaguezian; Leo Manuelian; Nayiri Tavlian; Miguel Angel Nalpatian;

Myrna Karamanoukian; Peter Adourian; Raffy Dikranian; Rouben Shougarian; Siamanto Oknaian; Stepan Piligian; Sylvie Balian; Varoujan Knouni;

Viktor A. Badalyan; Zaven Khanjian; Nayiri Abrahamian; Maro Shorjian; Nora Ulrich; Mihran Meneshian; Tony Terzian;

Jacques Perigaud; Grish Begian; Araxi Mangou; Lena Ellezian; Zareh Sarkissian; Ari Pailakian; Harry Barian; Leila Gorguis; Rafi Zanian; Antranik Sirinyan;

Hasmig Garabedian; Hachik Madilian; Mary Arevian; Armen Aghasaryan; Harry Parsekian; Areg Ayvazyan; Artur Sakunts;

Sylvie Yeghiaian; Gayane Hovhannisyan; Gary Grigorian; Irma Madilian; Alec Kouyoumdjian; Armin Herabit; Razmig Mardigian; Roubina Eykjian;

Mark Berg; Joseph Nahapetian; Zareh Bastajian; Seta Tokatlian; Vicken DerSarkissian; Hovsep Daghdigian; Alex Barboza;

Christine Kouyoumdjian; Lina Davidian; Elmira Arakelyan; Varoujan Boghossian;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Articles on Turkey‏

Turkey bids to win support for Armenia deal
ANKARA, Sept 11 2009


Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu set out Friday to overcome
opposition to the normalisation of ties with Armenia which have been
marked by decades of animosity.

Turkey and Armenia announced last month that they had agreed a
framework to establish diplomatic ties and re-open their border, in
what was internationally hailed as a major breakthrough. The talks
were mediated by Switzerland.

The two countries said they would hold internal political
consultations for six weeks before submitting to their parliaments two
protocols on establishing diplomatic ties and developing bilateral
relations.

"We aim to brief all political parties, institutions and civic bodies
on the protocols that will be signed," Davutolgu told reporters after
meeting parliament speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin.

He added that he had also asked for meetings with opposition
leaders. "We want to hold the briefings before parliament returns from
summer recess" in October."

Turkish opposition parties have expressed hostility to the plan which
they say is against Turkey's interests and threatens ties with
regional ally Azerbaijan.

Main opposition leader Deniz Baykal announced this month that his
party would not support the deal unless Armenia withdrews from
Nagorny-Karabakh, an Armenian majority enclave that broke free
Azerbaijan in the early 1990s.

Devlet Bahceli, chairman of the second largest opposition party,
slammed the protocols as a Turkish "surrender" to Armenia.

Turkey has long refused to establish diplomatic links with Armenia
over Yerevan's efforts to have World War I-era massacres of Armenians
by Ottoman Turks recognised as genocide -- a label Turkey strongly
rejects.

Armenians say up to 1.5 million of their kin were systematically
killed between 1915 and 1917 as the Ottoman Empire, Turkey's
predecessor, was falling apart.

Turkey also closed its border with Armenia in 1993 in solidarity with
Azerbaijan over Yerevan's backing of ethnic Armenian separatists in
Nagorny Karabakh.

Reconciliation between Ankara and Yerevan would bolster Turkey's bid
to join the European Union, throw an economic lifeline to landlocked
Armenia and bring stability to a strategic region serving as a major
energy corridor.

The International Herald Tribune, France
September 11, 2009 Friday
Cold on Turkey
by Martti Ahtisaari

Europe's wavering on Turkey's E.U. accession is jeopardizing its
credibility.

Turkey's aspiration to join the European Union motivated it to make a
series of remarkable transformations between 2000 and 2005.

Ankara amended a third of the country's authoritarian
Constitution. Its legislators enacted human rights laws in line with
international standards. It abolished the death penalty. It provided
greater legal protections for women. It introduced new safeguards
against torture and reformed the penal system. It scrapped draconian
restrictions on freedom of expression, association and the media.

The Turkish armed forces have stepped further back from the dominant
role they had played in the country's political life since the time of
its founding father, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Turkish-Kurdish tensions
have eased. Turks have begun to debate the Armenian question openly.

Turkey has also made significant positive input as a regional power,
contributing troops for international peacekeeping missions and
supporting talks to settle the Cyprus conflict in 2004. Let us also
not forget the significant cooling of animosities between Greece and
Turkey.

Yet despite so promising a start, the process of Turkey's accession to
the E.U. has lost significant momentum since 2005. Negative statements
and actions by E.U. leaders have played a key role in discouraging
Turkey. These have undermined Ankara's will to reform and have fueled
resentment. Popular support in Turkey for E.U. membership continues to
wane. Frustrated leaders in Turkey lament that the E.U. would reject
Turkey's accession even if Ankara implements all the prerequisite
reforms and meets all other preconditions.

Europe's wavering on Turkey's E.U. accession is jeopardizing the
E.U.'s credibility and threatening to tarnish its good image. How can
European leaders be trusted if they continue to go back on their word,
stalling, and perhaps scuttling, a process that began a decade ago
with so much promise, has produced so many positive effects, and holds
such potential for the future?

During my three decades in mediating conflicts around the globe, I
have learned that only rarely, perhaps once in a generation, do the
political planets align for dramatic solutions. (In the past few years
just such an alignment appeared over Northern Ireland.)

A promising alignment is now appearing over a land of key importance
for both the E.U. and Turkey: Cyprus. Ongoing talks between the
leaders of the island's Greek and Turkish communities offer the best
and probably the last chance to avoid an indefinite partition of the
island. A settlement on Cyprus - something that both Turkey and the
E.U. can contribute to achieving - would breathe new life into the
accession negotiations between Turkey and the E.U. and hasten the day
when both sides can gain full advantage from each other.

Strengthening the relationship between Turkey and the E.U. through
accession negotiations offers a clear opportunity to serve the E.U.'s
interests in energy security and to bolster stability both in the
Middle East and the South Caucasus.

If Turkey were to meet the remaining requirements for membership, the
country would enjoy a more open society. It would be more comfortable
in its own diversity. It would demonstrate that Islam and democracy
are fully compatible. Such a Turkey would be a beacon to East and West
alike. Its integration would help galvanize the E.U. to embrace its
own diversity and enhance its position in the world as a trusted
partner.

On a cold Helsinki day in December 1999, E.U. leaders declared Turkey
to be "a candidate state destined to join the Union on the basis of
the same criteria as applied to the other candidate states." Today,
almost 10 years later, Turkey's destiny seems far less certain.

What is at stake is not just Turkey's future, but also the credibility
of the European Union as an honest broker.

The Washington Note
September 11, 2009 Friday 1:50 PM EST
Why Should Europe Accept Turkey Into Its Union?

I just finished reading the Independent Committee on Turkey's report
on Turkey's EU accession negotiations. The Committee consists of
European elder statesman who support Turkey's membership and are
alarmed by the "vicious circle" of events that is jeopardizing
Turkey's EU prospects.

The term "vicious circle" is meant to capture how European opposition
to Turkey's membership has led to a slowdown in Turkey's reform
program, which in turn has led to further opposition within Europe.

Overall, the report makes a compelling, balanced case for why it is in
Europe's interests to do everything it can to move the negotiations
along and eventually accept Turkey's full membership.

The Committee demonstrates the hollowness of French and German calls
for a "privileged partnership," noting the fact that Turkey is already
as integrated with Europe as any other non-member, and thus already
enjoys a privileged partnership.

The report also correctly identifies the Cyprus, Kurdish, and Armenian
conflicts - along with the ongoing struggle to reform Turkey's
democratic institutions - as the primary obstacles to Turkey's
membership.

Missing from the report, however, is a compelling, imaginative vision
of what Europe is likely to look like in 15-20 years, and how
incorporating Turkey's young population, dynamic economy, access to
energy resources, and large, professional army will strengthen
Europe's position. The authors make each of these points separately,
but I would have liked to have read a concluding chapter that paints
the picture a bit more clearly.

Another quibble is that the report does not mention the Turkish army,
save for in the context of Turkey's domestic political
struggle. Turkey possesses the second largest army in NATO, a fact
that should not be overlooked when making the strategic case for
Turkey's EU membership.

I understand that the European Union likes to think it makes its
decisions based on democratic principles rather than strategic
calculation - but Paris and Berlin think strategically, and it is
Sarkozy and Merkel who are Turkey's most significant opponents.

The essential point that the authors certainly understand - but that
must be made explicitly - is the fact that Europe is stuck with Turkey
no matter what. Whether or not the accession process moves forward,
Turkey will be a large, influential country on Europe's
borders. Europe's best chance to shape Turkey's trajectory is to keep
the negotiation process alive.

PanARMENIAN.Net
Armenian-Turkish relations: viewpoint from Ankara

Nagorno Karabakh will serve as a condition for the realization of
Nabucco or any transnational or regional communication project.
10.09.2009 GMT+04:00

The issue of Armenian-Turkish relations has become the subject of
discussion of not only the Armenian society but also that of the world
media. And, for some reason, the focus is mainly on Armenia's
position, though no less important is the standpoint of Turkey, which,
is hardly talked about. If we consider the situation from Ankara's
viewpoint or generally from Turkish perspective, Armenia is an enemy
to Turkey, a country that hinders her to meet her strategic
objectives.

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Even in the years of 1918-1923, when the Entente and
afterwards Greece with the support of the Entente immersed into
Continental Turkey and successfully moved to Ankara, Turkey
concentrated all the power of her army on the Caucasian front against
the Armenians. And only after solving all her problems with the
support of the Bolshevik Russia on this front, did Turkey send her
troops to the West.

This fact alone shows the great importance that Turkey attaches to the
Armenian question. It is her biggest concern and she will do
everything in her traditional manner: give only promises, sign dozens
of contracts, accomplish no single item of the agreements signed,
harass and slaughter the Christian population. It has always been
so. No need to list all the contracts and the solemn commitments given
by Turkish sultans to European leaders...

As for Turkey's present stance, she is a country that will never do
anything for the benefit of any other state in the world, especially
for the Armenian people, their growth, prosperity and consolidation of
statehood. Transit projects like Nabucco or the `Great Silk Road'
passing through Armenia are destined to failure for the simple reason
that Turkey will never allow them.

Solving her problems - the recognition of borders defined by the Kars
Agreement and softening
ognition ` as well as strengthening the inter-state borders legally
and transferring the issue of the Armenian Genocide to the level of
historical discussion that could last for years, Turkey will abruptly
turn to the implementation of joint Turkish-Azerbaijani plans, the
return of Artsakh to Azerbaijan being a priority. Thus, Nagorno
Karabakh will serve as a condition for the realization of Nabucco or
any transnational or regional communication project, an idea that will
be (or is already) imposed on Europe.

So, in the foreseeable future we shouldn't rely on any transit
communications from Asia to Europe, as the railroad lines of Armenia
rest on Azerbaijan in the east, thus being destined to permanent
unfeasibility, while the beginning of construction of railway
communication with Iran is on hold for another year because of
indistinctness of the status of the liberated lands and the indistinct
position of official Yerevan.

Thus, we shouldn't expect any major economic benefits referred to by a
number of politicians and economists, who are for the opening of the
Armenian-Turkish border. Minor border trade cannot improve the
country's economy; it simply contributes to the welfare of business
people involved in export and the local population of the
borderland. Here are all our dividends.

Politics, in essence, is the art of trading. And there is always a
place for more or less equal exchange under favorable conditions; for
example, the recognition of the status of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic in exchange for the return of part of the liberated lands of
no strategic value, or opening of the Armenian-Turkish border with
consideration of conditions of the Kars agreement in return for
recognition of the Genocide.

It is also appropriate to mention that today Turkey needs a
breakthrough, breakthrough to the latest industrial and civilization
achievements of the West and to a revised national idea. Today the
country is under the threat of militant nationalism, replenished with
the religious factor, still contr
he Turkish leadership. However, today the Turkish leadership faces new
challenges associated with the national identity of its population,
the Kurdish question and white spots of the history offered to the
advanced layer of the society. The (urban) society has already started
a cautious revision of the old ideals, which was provoked by loud
murders and scandals connected with the Armenian issue.

In the eyes of their public the Turkish leadership needs real
diplomatic victories or at least, an illusion of progressive advance
in civilization.

As for the reasons why the Administration of the President of Armenia
has intensified the dialogue with Turkey on normalization of
Armenian-Turkish relations, it must be regarded as a Russian-American
and European confrontation in the region with the aim to solve their
tactical and strategic tasks, among which there are hardly any
pro-Armenian planks.

Mikhail Balayan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Armenia:Turkey Protocols - more articles‏

Getting This Wrong Will Be Unforgivable
Tuesday, 08 September 2009 09:55

Written by Vartan Oskanian |
Analysis / Turkey

We are at a crossroads in our history. We have on the table the first bilateral

document that the independent sovereign Republic of Armenia intends to sign

with the Republic of Turkey. This is an unprecedented process that is far-reaching

and irreversible.

Yet, the debate on the issue is going in the wrong direction. It is hugely insulting

that high-level government officials can be this dismissive and trivializing on a

matter that is so critical for our people.

There is no sense whatsoever in telling us that what we see is not what we get.

It is not reasonable to spell out a set of specifics and then defend an incongruous

but desirable interpretation. That is not how political documents work. It is indeed

possible to write flexibly and loosely in order to allow both sides to interpret things

differently. But this is not that document. This document, perhaps good intentioned,

is formulated badly.

When the Armenian side says that although the protocol specifies recognition of

today’s borders, that does not mean that we are renouncing past borders, that is

absurd. That would be commensurate to the Turks saying, for example, that

although there is reference to the border opening, that does not mean that

Armenians will necessarily receive visas.

Or when the Armenian side says that the formulation about a sub-commission’s

“examination of historical records and archives” does not mean they will study the

genocide, this is like the Turkish side saying they will open the border, but not at

Margara, but some 10-meter space somewhere near the 40th latitude and 45th

longitude. Again, this is absurd.

The reality is that a good idea, a needed policy, a necessary move toward

rapprochement has been negotiated poorly and framed dangerously. It is

irresponsible of our government to force our people to make such choices about

our present and our future.

The history of our relations (and non-relations) with Turkey has a pre-history and

begins before Turkey’s closing of the Turkey-Armenia border in 1993.
After Turkey recognized Armenia as an independent republic in 1991, it laid down

two clear conditions that had to be met by Armenia before it would establish

diplomatic relations: Armenia was expected to renounce territorial claims on

Turkey, and Armenia was to set aside or dismiss the genocide recognition

process. (Turkey’s later proposal of a historic commission was the modification

of this last condition.) In 1993, with the border closure in support of its brethren in

Azerbaijan, Turkey added a new condition to the other two already existing, that

Armenia renounce Nagorno Karabakh’s struggle for security and self-determination

by conceding to an Azerbaijani-favorable solution.

To forget this pre-history, or to expect us to forget, or – worse – to pretend that

Turkey has forgotten, is not serious. In the context of Turkey’s consistent policies

about territorial issues, genocide recognition and Karabakh concessions, our public

debate must revolve on the substance of what this protocol gives Armenians and

what it takes away.

Even when signed, these protocols merely tell us Turkey’s willingness to enter into

diplomatic relations and to open the border. The open border will become reality

only after eventual parliament ratification.

But whether ratified or not, Turkey will still have received what it wanted. When

signed, this protocol gives Turkey the opportunity to tell the world that Armenians

have in fact conceptually relinquished territorial claims and are also ready to offer

the genocide for bilateral study, therefore no third-party involvement, recognition or

condemnation is in order.

As someone who has worked for such normalization both with Turkey and

Azerbaijan, I would want nothing more than to see agreements, knowing full well

they must come with difficult concessions. The negotiations about these

concessionshowever should not endanger our future security nor violate our integrity

and values. We can and should, as the protocol says, ‘implement a dialogue on the

historical dimension’ with ‘the aim of restoring mutual confidence’ but the way to do

that is not by mandating an ‘impartial scientific examination of historical records’ as

if all other examinations thus far have been neither impartial nor scientific. In earlier

negotiations, we focused on creating an intergovernmental commission with the aim

of overcoming the consequences of our tragic past.

Alternate, more dignified, wording is also possible on the border issue. We can and

should, as the protocol says, ‘respect and ensure respect for the principles of equality,

sovereignty, non-intervention in internal affairs of other states, territorial integrity and

inviolability of frontiers.’ The focus on territorial integrity is the international formulation

that protects concerns about frontiers, while not diminishing the right to pursue

historical injustices. The current formulation about ‘the mutual recognition of the existing

border’ should have been avoided.

However, an equal risk in this document is the unwritten one. The link to Nagorno

Karabakh, unwritten perhaps, but clearly spoken at every turn are the repeated,

continuing, unabated, undiminished affirmations of the highest Turkish and Azerbaijani

officials who insist that Turkey will continue to defend the interests of Azerbaijan and

nothing will be done, no border will open, until the Nagorno Karabakh settlement process

begins to move in a direction that suits Azerbaijan.

In fact, expecting Turkey to move without considering Azerbaijan’s interests would be

similar to expecting Armenia to move without considering Karabakh’s interests. This is

not and was not a reasonable expectation.

In which case, if ratification is to take place, and if it’s to take place before the next

Obama-April 24 deadline facing Turkey, then we can expect that Azerbaijan has received

sufficient guarantees on the return of territories and on the status of Nagorno Karabakh.
These are the worrisome elements – both in the content of these documents, and in the

hasty process that accompanies it – that cast doubt on the intent of the document. It also

makes clear the readiness to lower the bar to reach an agreement, at questionable cost.
If this implies distrust on our part, that should be eminently understandable. On the

Armenian side, those who crafted this document are insisting that it really means

something other than what it says. On the other side, Turkey is to ‘refrain from pursuing

any policy incompatible with the spirit of good neighborly relations,’ yet it continues to

side with one neighbor Azerbaijan, against their other neighbor Armenia.

In other words, on the ground, nothing seems to have changed. Yet, the Armenian bar

has clearly moved lower in the Armenia-Turkey negotiations, and therefore it is natural

to assume that the same thing may be happening in the Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations.
This is the situation today, as we are presented documents not for and by third parties,

as with the countless historical documents of the past where Armenia is a subject and

not a party, but for the first time in history, a document in which Armenia is signing on

to its own perceived place in history.

This document with such formulations should not be signed. Indeed, no one is authorized

to sign this document with such formulations.

AZERBAIJAN NERVOUSLY WATCHING TURKISH-ARMENIAN RAPPROCHEMENT
By: Fariz Ismailzade

Jamestown Foundation
Sept 11 2009

The Turkish-Armenian agreement on September 1 to start political
consultations aimed at establishing diplomatic relations between the
two countries has once again raised concerns in Baku. It is only
four months since the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
visited Baku and assured Azerbaijani politicians and the public that
the closed border between Turkey and Armenia will remain unchanged
until the occupied territories of Azerbaijan are liberated. Yet,
the recent announcement by Armenian and Turkish diplomats once again
shocked political circles in Azerbaijan.

The ruling party -Yeni Azerbaijan Party- immediately announced
on September 2 that "the party considers the normalization of
Turkish-Armenian relations unacceptable until Karabakh is liberated"
(www.day.az, September 2). Mubariz Gurbanly, the deputy executive
secretary of the party added, "Turkey and Azerbaijan are strategic
allies. Our relations are based on the principles of 'one nation-two
states.' Much unites our countries. These recent talks between Armenia
and Turkey negatively influence public opinion in Azerbaijan." Ali
Ahmadov, a member of parliament and one of the most influential MP's in
the ruling party, drew attention to the speech made in the Azerbaijani
parliament by Erdogan: "We respect that statement in which Erdogan
said that the border will not re-open prior the resolution of the
Karabakh conflict" (Trend News, September 5).

The Azeri foreign ministry also issued a statement, saying that
the establishment of relations with other countries is a sovereign
right of every nation, yet considering the fact that the re-opening
of the Turkish-Armenian border touches on the national interests of
Azerbaijan, this matter cannot be resolved without the resolution of
the Karabakh conflict. Elkhan Polukhov, a spokesman for the foreign
ministry, recalled that the borders were closed in response to the
Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territory. "Thus, they can open
only after the occupation has ended" (www.day.az, September 1).

Although Turkish politicians rushed to reassure their Azerbaijani
colleagues that Turkey will not act against the national interests of
Azerbaijan, tension over the issue remains high in Baku. The Azeri
Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov held a telephone call with his
Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu to clarify Baku's stance, and
received further assurances from the Turkish side. On September 8,
while on a visit to Georgia, Davutoglu stated that "much time remains
until the borders will open" (APA News). The Turkish President Abdullah
Gul, also stated that "Turkey will not take steps which will disappoint
Azerbaijan" (Trend, September 8).

The majority in Azerbaijan link the re-opening of the
Turkish-Armenian border to the resolution of the Karabakh
conflict. Azerbaijani political circles are not against the
normalization of Turkish-Armenians relations per se, yet they would
like to see this process tied to the withdrawal of Armenian military
forces from the occupied Azerbaijani lands. The recent peace talks
between the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents failed to produce any
concrete breakthrough. Observers in Baku noted Yerevan's stubbornness
and refusal to free Azerbaijani lands in exchange for the gradual
normalization of Azerbaijani-Armenian political, economic and trade
relations. Thus, the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border, they
believe, might further embolden Armenia and make it less likely to
compromise on the Karabakh issue.

There are those, however, who believe that the re-opening of the
Turkish-Armenian border will eventually prove positive for Azerbaijan
and for the whole region. "Normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations
will diminish Russian influence over Armenia, and will be beneficial
for Azerbaijan," according to the Azeri political scientist Ilgar
Mammadov (www.ilgarmammadov.lifejournal.com, September 2).

The international community welcomed the Turkish-Armenian
rapprochement, as a positive step towards securing sustainable peace
and prosperity in the South Caucasus. Indeed, the cold war between
Turkey and Armenia has not produced any tangible positive results
over the past decade. Armenia still refuses to liberate the occupied
Azerbaijani lands and has fallen more and more into military and
economic dependence on Russia. It is hoped that the normalization of
Turkish-Armenian relations will break the status quo and provide more
opportunities for peace in the region.

Yet, it remains to be seen how Azerbaijan will react to the Turkish
decision. If Baku's stance is not taken into consideration, the
consequences for Ankara might be unpredictable. Without winning a new
friend, Turkey might lose an old one. Thus, the strategic presence
of Turkey in the region, as well as the prospects for such regional
projects as the Nabucco gas pipeline might be significantly weakened.

EUROPEAN ARMENIAN FEDERATION

For Justice & Democracy

ARMENIAN /TURKISH PROTOCOLS: TURKEY’S PRECONDITIONS

VIOLATE THE PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

On Monday, 31st August, Armenia and Turkey, under the aegis of the

Swiss diplomacy, announced that they agreed to start internal political

consultations in order to sign and swiftly ratify two protocols aiming at

normalising their relations.

According to the joint press release, the two parties claim that they will complete the

consultations on the “protocol on the establishment of diplomatic relations” and on

the “protocol on the development of bilateral relations” in six weeks, further to which

they pretend to quickly reach a ratification “in line with their constitutional and legal procedures”.

These documents were made public

A close examination of the protocols (attached herein) clearly reveals that the purview of

these documents – historically unprecedented between the two neighbouring states

– goes far beyond the mere “normalisation” and border-opening issues being discussed

between Armenia and Turkey over many years. These protocols embrace,

in a fundamental way, the full scope of unresolved issues between Turkey

and the Armenian people worldwide, including those involving the legitimate

rights of the European Armenian communities. Through the protocols, and

mobilizing immense resources of international pressure, Turkey has indeed

imposed its preconditions, which Armenia had categorically rejected so far.

The European Armenian Federation considers these protocols a dangerous

retreat from Armenia’s time-honoured policy of welcoming normalisation

of relations with Turkey, but without any pre-conditions. The Turkish

government’s pre-conditions violate the core principles of international law

as they involve acceptance by Armenia of the terms and conditions of old

and illegitimate treaties long pre-dating the existence of independent Armenia.

They involve the abandonment by Armenia of all efforts toward the

international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. They also involve

complete capitulation by Armenia to Azerbaijan’s terms in the Karabagh

negotiations, as re-iterated by Minister Davutoglu on the very day,

i.e. September 1^st, of the announcement of the protocols. Furthermore,

the tri-lateral announcement fails to recognize the fact that the people of

Nagorno Karabagh and the communities of the Armenian Diaspora – therefore

the European Armenians – are legitimate parties to any “political

consultations” involving these issues.

“Turkey should not be permitted to abuse these bilateral negotiations

“packaging away” its historic national liabilities in border-opening agreements

with Armenia, its economically vulnerable neighbour. The international

community must reject Turkey’s most recent practice of imposing its policy

of denial of the Armenian genocide through such biased bilateral deals. And

the Swiss government should be more vigilant in its assessment of the

moral implications of its mediation initiative given Turkey’s questionable

record in all these issues,” stated Hilda Tchoboian the chairperson of the

European Armenian Federation.

« For decades, the European Armenian communities fought all forms of genocide denial,

advocated for the right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno Karabagh, and

defended the heritage of the Armenian people in all of its aspects, having by their side

the unwavering support of the European society to their Just Cause. Today, we reaffirm

our commitment to defend the legitimate rights of our People with the same determination,”

concluded Hilda Tchoboian.

RFE/RL Reports

Turkish FM Discusses Armenia Deal In Parliament
Azerbaijan -- Ahmet Davutoglu, foreign minister of Turkey, in Baku,
11.09.2009
Emil Danielyan, Tatevik Lazarian

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu opened on Friday
consultations with his country's top political leaders on the draft
agreements envisaging the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations.

Ankara and Yerevan publicized the two agreements on August 31 and
pledged to sign them after six of `internal political consultations.'
The two protocols have to be ratified by the parliaments of the two
nations before they can come into effect.

`We aim to brief all political parties, institutions and civic bodies
on the protocols that will be signed,' AFP news agency quoted
Davutoglu as telling reporters after meeting Turkish parliament
speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin.

Davutoglu added that he also asked for meetings with the leaders of
Turkey's two largest opposition parties represented in parliament.
`We want to hold the briefings before parliament returns from summer
recess in October,' he said.

Both opposition parties have said that they will continue to oppose
the establishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey
and reopening of their border before a resolution of the Nagorno-
Karabakh conflict that would satisfy Azerbaijan. One of them, the
Nationalist Movement Party, has slammed the Western-backed agreements
as a Turkish `surrender' to Armenia.

Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), which
controls the majority of parliament seats, has yet to formulate its
position on the protocol ratification. Its leader, Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has repeatedly stated in recent months that
Ankara will not normalize ties with Yerevan as long as the Karabakh
conflict remains unresolved.

Many politicians and pundits in Yerevan predict that Erdogan's'
government will block or delay the parliamentary endorsement of the
protocols if the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan fail to achieve
a breakthrough in their peace talks in the coming months. Some
Turkish commentators have likewise suggested that their ratification
is contingent on a Karabakh deal.

Both the United States and the European Union have welcomed the
Turkish-Armenian agreements and stressed the need for their speedy
implementation. `We urge Armenia and Turkey to proceed expeditiously,
according to the agreed framework as described in today's statement,'
a U.S. State Department spokesman said last week.

The protocols' ratification by the Armenian parliament is widely seen
as a forgone conclusion. Both the Republican Party of President Serzh
Sarkisian and its two junior coalition partners, which enjoy a
comfortable parliament majority, have voiced their unequivocal
support for the deal.

Even so, the deal's most vocal Armenian opponent, the Armenian
Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), said on Friday it is
lobbying members of the parliament majority to break ranks and vote
against the ratification. Aghvan Vartanian, one of the nationalist
party's leaders, also told reporters that Dashnaktsutyun will soon
draft and circulate specific amendments which it believes must be
made in the documents. `I think it will be clear to every educated
and thinking person whether they accept this variant,' he said.

Dashnaktsutyun is especially opposed to the planned formation of a
Turkish-Armenian panel of historians tasked with looking into the
1915 mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. It says that
the very existence of such a body would seriously hamper greater
international recognition of the massacres as genocide.



Business Leader Looks Forward To Open Border With Turkey
Armenia -- Arsen Ghazarian, co-chairman of the Turkish-Armenian
Business Council.
11.09.2009
Lilit Harutiunian

The possible opening of the Turkish border would significantly
benefit the Armenian economy and have little adverse impact on local
manufacturers, the chairman of Armenia's largest business association
insisted on Friday.

Arsen Ghazarian, who heads the Union of Industrialists and
Entrepreneurs, predicted that cross-border commerce would quickly
spur economic activity and create many jobs in Armenian regions
bordering Turkey.

`We would also be able to implement serious joint projects in the
energy sphere,' he said. `Our two cement plans, which I'm sure are
not operating at their full capacity, would be able to meet the
Turkish industry's demand and to make decent profits.

`We would have quite serious projects in the textile sector. I am
talking about quite serious turnovers.'

Ghazarian has for years voiced such views in his separate capacity as
the Armenian co-chairman of the Turkish-Armenian Business Council
(TABC), a private group uniting businessmen from the two neighboring
countries. The reopening of the Turkish-Armenian border, a key aim of
the TABC, became a real possibility after Ankara and Yerevan unveiled
draft agreements on the normalization of bilateral relations.

The prospect of an open border with Turkey has long caused unease
among some Armenian politicians, businessmen and economists. They
fear that an influx of cheap Turkish imports could wreak havoc on the
country's fledgling manufacturing and farming sectors. Some have gone
as far as to declare that the Turkish economic blockade has been a
blessing in disguise for Armenia.

Ghazarian brushed aside these concerns at a news conference in
Yerevan. `Let's face it, in our society there is not much enthusiasm
for Turkish consumer goods to begin with,' he said.

`Besides, many of our enterprises in the food-processing and plastic
items sectors bring in a considerable part of their raw materials
from Turkey because it's close and cheap. In that case [of border
opening,] it will be even closer and cheaper,' he added.

Ghazarian further argued that an open border with Turkey will become
all the more important in the event of the resolution of the Nagorno-
Karabakh conflict and restoration of commercial links between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. That, he said, would turn Armenia into a regional
transit country linking Turkey to Azerbaijan and Central Asia.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Independence Day Celebration on 19 September 2009‏

The Embassy of the

Republic of Armenia

The Armenian Community & Church Council of Great Britain

under the auspices of

The Embassy of the Republic of Armenia

cordially invite you to the official Celebration of the 18^th anniversary

of

THE Independence Day of the Republic of Armenia

hosted by

Armenian Heritage and Cultural Committee of ACCC

The event will take place on Saturday 19^th September 2009 at 7:30 pm

at St. Yeghiche Church, Cranley Gardens, Kensington, London SW7.

Free admission.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Armenian News‏

FIVE ARMENIAN SOLDIERS KILLED NEAR KARABAKH -MEDIA
By Afet Mehtiyeva
Reuters
Sept 10 2009

* Nagorno-Karabakh authorities deny report * Tensions rising with
Armenia-Turkey thaw

BAKU, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Azeri media said five Armenian soldiers
were killed on Thursday in a clash with Azerbaijan's forces near the
disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the rebel territory dismissed
the report.

The Azerbaijan Defence Ministry declined to comment.

Tensions in the region are rising as Armenia and close Azeri
ally Turkey make progress towards opening their joint border and
establishing diplomatic relations, angering oil-producing Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan's ANS Press said the fight took place in the Agdam district,
next to Nagorno-Karabakh, which threw off Azeri rule in the early
1990s with Armenian backing.

A spokesman for the Nagorno-Karabakh Defence Ministry said the report
was "Azeri propaganda".

Agdam is one of seven Azeri districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh
and is held by Armenian forces.

Clashes are common between forces manning the frontline. The last
fatal exchange was in January, when Azerbaijan, which supplies oil
and gas to the West, said it had killed three Armenian soldiers.

Turkey, which is on the verge of an historic deal to restore ties
with Armenia, said it was seeking details of the report. "If the
report would be confirmed, it would become a source of concern,"
Foreign Ministry spokesman Burak Ozugergin said.

Christian ethnic Armenians, backed by Armenia, fought a war in the
1990s to end mainly Muslim Azerbaijan's control over mountainous
Nagorno-Karabakh. An estimated 30,000 people were killed and a peace
accord has never been reached.

Mediators from the United States, France and Russia say they are
close to a breakthrough in negotiations between Armenian President
Serzh Sarksyan and his Azeri counterpart Ilham Aliyev.

Turkey closed its frontier with Armenia in 1993 in solidarity with
Azerbaijan, which now fears losing leverage over Armenia in the
conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh if the border is reopened.

Turkey and Armenia said last month they had agreed to establish
diplomatic ties and open the border. Their presidents are due to sign
the accords in mid-October, before submitting them to the Turkish
and Armenian parliaments for approval.

Under the deal, the border should reopen within two months of
ratification, possibly by New Year. (Additional reporting by Hasmik
Mkrtchyan in Yerevan, Matt Robinson in Tbilisi and Zerin Elci in
Ankara; writing by Matt Robinson; Editing by Mark Trevelyan).

ARMENIA 2-1 BELGIUM: RED DEVILS IN CRISIS AS HOSTS

ENJOY HISTORIC WIN
Goal.com
Sept 9 2009
A disastrous result for the visitors in Yerevan...

Armenia 2-1 Belgium Lineups/Stats European World Cup Qualification
Fixtures, Results

Belgium crashed out of contention for World Cup qualification after
Armenia enjoyed their first competitive win since June 2007.

Hovhannes Goharyan and Sargis Hovsepyan hit the decisive strikes on
either side of the break to make it four points for the campaign and
knock the Red Devils formally out of the competition.

The first period saw few chances for the hosts and none at all for
the Belgians. To the Armenians' credit they took one of theirs,
Goharyan netting after his first shot was rebounded back at his feet.

Timmy Simons prevented the Belgians from adding a second shortly
afterwards as the hosts turned up the pressure.

For the second goal, just after the restart, captain Hovsepyan
waltzed through the static Belgian defence before slipping the ball
past Gillet.

The visitors were in panic mode, but they struggled to turn their
urgency into opportunities.

Indeed, their consolation goal came in the very last minute as Daniel
Van Buyten netted at the death.

This, though, will not save the players and departing coach Franky
Vercauteren from the wrath of the fans after suffering a defeat to
a side half their FIFA placing, 125 to Belgium's 62.

AZERI WRESTLERS IN ARMENIA FOR EUROPEAN CHAMPIONSHIP
Hasmik Smbatian
Armenialiberty.org
Sept 9 2009

Armenia -- Judo contest, undated 09.09.2009

Five young athletes from Azerbaijan arrived in Yerevan late on Tuesday
to compete in a European judo championship for juniors and mark their
country's first-ever participation in a sporting event held in Armenia
since the Soviet collapse.

The tournament, which starts on Friday, will bring together judo teams
from about 40 countries, including Turkey. Azerbaijan's participation
in it was made possible by a special agreement signed by the Armenian
and Azerbaijani ministers of sport in Yerevan last week.

The agreement commits the host country to ensuring the Azerbaijani
team's security, creating adequate conditions for it, and playing
Azerbaijan's national anthem if one of its wrestlers becomes a
European champion.

Tight security measures were visible on Wednesday at a Yerevan
hotel where the 15-strong Azerbaijani delegation, which also includes
coaches, doctors, judo officials and journalists, will stay during the
competition. "We can't go anywhere without them," Gunduz Abbaszade,
a sports reporter for Azerbaijan's ANS television, told RFE/RL,
pointing to scores of security officers deployed in the hotel lobby.

"We are not scared because they are with us," he said. "Everything
is fine ... The main thing is that they don't hinder us."

"This day will probably do gown in history," grinned Azer Garayev,
an ANS cameraman.

In Abbaszade's words, the Azerbaijani athletes are determined to
win with gold medals in Yerevan. Aleksan Avetisian, chairman of the
Armenian Judo Federation, admitted that they have good chances of
doing well in the tournament.

"I must say that Azerbaijan has a fairly strong team," Avetisian
told RFE/RL. "They won a gold medal in last years' Olympic Games,
something which many countries can only dream about."

The unresolved conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh has been an extremely
serious hindrance to Armenian and Azerbaijani athletes' participation
in sporting events held in each other's country. Citing the conflict,
the Azerbaijani government usually opposes the presence of various
Armenian delegations on its soil.

In 2007, the authorities in Baku refused to guarantee the security
of Armenia's national soccer team, which was due to play Azerbaijan
as part of a qualifying campaign for the 2008 European football
championship. The Armenian side rejected Azerbaijani demands that
the games between the two teams be played in a neutral venue, leading
European football's governing body, UEFA, to cancel the fixtures.

Later that year, the Azerbaijani government reluctantly agreed to
allow Armenian wrestlers to compete in a world championship in Baku,
under apparent pressure from the International Olympic Committee and
FILA, the sport's world governing body.

IWPR Report

SOUTH CAUCASUS FRONTIER SQUABBLE
New Georgian border splits Armenian villagers from their land.
By Naira Melkumian, Yeranuhi Soghoian and Nana Mamagulishvili

in Bavra

Some Armenian villagers may have to slaughter cows they cannot afford to

feed, now that Georgian border guards have unilaterally decided their

traditional grazing lands are Georgian territory.

Georgian officials declined to comment on the situation, but some

Armenian politicians said the August 25 move by their counterparts in

Tbilisi was unjustified and illegal.

"I could not collect hay. I have 11 cattle, and what will I feed them with

this winter," asked Nvard Shahbekian, a resident of the village of Bavra,

which lies on the border between the two South Caucasus countries.

She has calculated that she will need 20 tonnes of hay to feed her

livestock, and could now have to buy the feed at 80 US dollars a tonne.

"What can I do? I don't have this money. Even if I am going to be shot,

I must collect my own hay," she said.

The villagers said the Georgian border guards had suddenly set up a

checkpoint between them and their fields, and threatened to fine them

2,000 laris (1,200 dollars) if they passed it, although Georgian officials

were not available to confirm this.

Shahbekian's cattle, and those of her neighbours, are hostages to

legal uncertainty surrounding the precise limits of the two countries.

Armenian and Georgian set up a joint commission more than a decade

ago to oversee the demarcation of their border but, as the Bavra

villagers' struggle makes clear, problems remain since 30 per cent of the

border is yet to be agreed on.

Experts say both sides are guilty of unilaterally defining the border to

serve their own purposes.

"There have been cases, when according to the Georgian authorities,

the Armenian side has itself unilaterally moved the border, therefore

until the delimitation is finished and there is an agreement between

the government at the level of foreign ministers, who head the

commission, the territorial resolution will not be final," Sergei Minasian,

an analyst at the Caucasus Institute in Yerevan, said.

The Armenians say the location of the border is laid out in a deal signed

between the two then-Soviet republics in 1921, and amendments to it

agreed over the next two decades.

"According to these amendments, the lands of Bavra in particular are

worked by Armenian farmers living in the village. Apart from this, they

have certificates of the privatisation of this land," said Shirak Torosian,

a member of the Armenian parliament from the ruling Republican Party.

He is also chairman of the Javakhq organisation, which campaigns for

ethnic Armenians who live in southern Georgia.

However, Georgian politicians source their claims from a 1947 map,

which awarded the land to them.

"Now the Georgian border guards see the actions of the Armenian

villagers as a violation of the border, and bring in the 1947 map, which

supposedly agreed that this territory is part of Georgia, but this is doubtful,

since in that difficult time, when the Second World War was ongoing, it is

unlikely that the border could be surveyed," Torosian said.

The Armenian foreign ministry confirmed that the border delimitation

were ongoing, and had even been on the agenda when Georgia's

foreign minister visited Yerevan on September 5. Georgian officials

were tight-lipped, however, and both the foreign ministry and the border

guards in Tbilisi refused to comment on the situation in Bavra.

"Between two young states, in which the process of institution building is

ongoing and the demarcation of the border is not finished, such incidents

can occur, but the situation is under control and will be regulated," said

David Darchiashvili, a member of the Georgian parliament and chairman

of its Committee on European Integration.

"The demarcation of the border is not completed, like with Azerbaijan,

but the situation is being stirred up by a few irresponsible websites. I am

sure that soon all will be made clear at a diplomatic level. This can all be

regulated if good will is shown."

Armenia has good reason not to make a scandal out of the incident,

since 70 per cent of the country's exports go via Georgian territory, which

is almost its only outlet to the outside world since its borders with

Azerbaijan and Turkey remain closed.

However, a number of recent bilateral problems have marred their close

ties. On June 19, for example, Torosian was barred from entering Georgia

without explanation. Torosian connects the refusal to allow him across the

border to his agitation on behalf of Armenians in Samtskhe-Javakheti,

where almost all the population are ethnic Armenians, and whose rights

have become a political issue in Armenia.

President Serzh Sarkisian raised the issue of Georgia's Armenian

population in an address to diplomats on September 1, saying his

government needed to support their compatriots abroad.

"I think, that steps towards recognising Armenian as a regional language

of Georgia, the registration of the Armenian Apostolic Church, and the

preservation of Armenian monuments in Georgia would only help the

strengtherning of Armenian-Georgian relations, and a deepened

atmosphere of mutual trust. We must be delicate in all these questions,

but at the same time, consistent and principled," he said.

While the politicians discussed, however, the villagers of Bavra like

Valerik Margarian, were contemplating a winter without livestock.

"I have four cows and three sheep, and if I cannot gather hay to feed

my stock this winter, then I will have to slaughter them, and then what

will I live on?" Margarian said.

Naira Melkumian and Yeranuhi Soghoian are freelance journalists in

Yerevan and Gyumri respectively. Nana Mamagulishvili is news editor

of the Fortuna radio station in Tbilisi.

BUSINESS SOFTWARE ALLIANCE: ONLY 20% OF COMPUTER

SHOPS IN ARMENIA OFFER LICENSED SOFTWARE
Arminfo
2009-09-10 15:54:00

ArmInfo. Business Software Alliance Office in Armenia has surveyed the
local computer market and revealed that only 20% of computer shops in
Armenia offer licensed software, BSA Legal Adviser Narine Mkrtchyan
said at press conference on Thursday. The survey involved 20 shops
(selected in a random way) offering computers. The surveyors visited
each shop by 5 times under pretense of customers. Only 4 of the 20
shops offered licensed software and refused to install unlicensed
one. A number of shops failed to offer licensed programs. N. Mkrtchyan
said that customers were just offered not to install licensed
software. "We are not going to cast doubt on the authority of companies
and privates. We are trying to raise public awareness of the necessity
of acquiring licensed software as well as to support the shops offering
legal products," she said.

She mentioned that International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)
estimated piracy in Armenia at 92% basing on the ratio of the sold
computers and licensed programs in the country. The survey results
will be submitted to the state authorities, including to the Agency
for Protection of Intellectual Property in Armenia at the Economy
Ministry. "Our further cooperation with the state department will
further be based on the precedents of copyright violations, including
use of Armenian fonts without consent of the authors as well as illegal
copying of intellectual property of show business representatives,"
N. Mkrtchyan said.

The Business Software Alliance is the voice of the world's commercial
software industry and its hardware partners before governments and
in the international marketplace. BSA programs foster technology
innovation through education and policy initiatives that promote
copyright protection, cyber security, trade, and e-commerce. Business
Software Alliance (BSA) is a nonprofit trade association created
to advance the goals of the software industry and its hardware
partners. It is the foremost organization dedicated to promoting
a safe and legal digital world. Headquartered in Washington, DC,
BSA is active in more than 80 countries.

Subject: Fwd: Khachaturian

Beautiful movie about Aram Khachaturyan, his life, his music,his country,

his successes and failures. Narrated by Eric Bogosian, music played by

the Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra.

Must watch!

http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/aram_khachaturian/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Economic News from Armenia‏

Armenian Home Sales Surge After Lengthy Decline
David Harutiunian
September 08, 2009

YEREVAN -- The number of real estate transactions in Armenia jumped by
36 percent in June after months of steep decline during the
international economic crisis, RFE/RL's Armenian Service reports.

David Harutiunian, a top aide to Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian who
oversees the government's anticrisis measures, told RFE/RL that the
increase in transactions reported by the State Cadastre Committee
bodes well for Armenia's emergence from its worst economic recession
since the early 1990s.

Harutiunian said the "increased activity in the market" is a
"significant indicator which shows that the [real estate] market is
slowly recovering and that we have passed the stage of [price]
fluctuations."

The rise in apartment and house sales was confirmed by private
developers.

Armen Mkoyan, director general of the Elite Group construction
company, said apartments are selling now. He added that the situation
is "stabilizing" and sales are increasing. He told RFE/RL that "we
have seen positive dynamics in the last two months."

Harutiunian attributed increased housing sales to the June
establishment of a state-owned mortgage fund that is supposed to make
housing loans cheaper and more accessible.

The National Mortgage Company has an authorized capital of 22 billion
drams ($58.3 million) and is expected to receive 20 million euros ($28
million) in additional funding from the German government.

IMF SPECIALISTS SAY OPENING OF ARMENIAN-TURKISH BORDER

WILL LEAD TO COMPETITIVE GROWTH OF ARMENIAN ECONOMY
ArmInfo
2009-09-09 12:43:00

ArmInfo. Opening of the Armenian-Turkish border will contribute to
competitive growth of Armenian economy, IMF Resident Representative
Nienke Oomes told media on Wednesday.

She said that low competition is reflected in import of goods into
Armenia as well as in the blockade of roads by the neighboring
states. IMF believes that opening of the Armenian-Turkish border
will create additional opportunities to stiffen competition with
Turkey as well as will become a good impetus for Armenian economy,
IMF Resident Representative said.

National Statistical Service of Armenia reported that commodity
turnover between Armenia and Turkey in 2008 totaled $269.5
million. Credit balance in favor of Turkey made up $127 million. The
commodity turnover is mainly via territory of Georgia because of
closed Armenian-Turkish border.

World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 ranked
Armenia the 97th out of 133 states involved in the report. Armenia's
position was left unchanged as compared to the rating for 2008- 2009.

Azerbaijan was up from the 69th to the 51st position. Georgia was
left the 90th and Russia was down 121 positions to the 63rd.

IMF: ECONOMIC DECLINE SLACKENING IN ARMENIA
ArmInfo
2009-09-09 12:38:00

ArmInfo. The International Monetary Fund experts say economic decline
in Armenia is slackening and positive trends have been observed, Nienke
Oomes, IMF Resident Representative in Armenia, told media on Wednesday.

She said that Armenian economy is over the worst and GDP fall in
Armenia for late 2009 will be lower than for the seven months of 2009
(18.5%). The IMF's last forecasts for GDP in Armenia are currently
being specified, but some 10%-15% economic decline and 3% average
yearly inflation are expected anyway, Nienke Oomes said. She
highlighted that real estate prices and transactions in this sector
were up in July as compared to the previous month. IMF representative
believes these positive trends very important, for 2/3 of GDP fall in
Armenia is the result of decline of construction scales and the share
of construction in the 18.5% GDP fall for the first 7 months of 2009
was 14.1%. She said that demand for housing is still high in Armenia
and the construction sector will develop in the mid-term outlook.

Nevertheless, Armenian economy was rather dependent on the construction
over the last years. Unfortunately, this sector is subject to wide
fluctuations, and the country's economy needs diversification. Nienke
Oomes said that positive trends have been observed also at mining and
metallurgical enterprises in Armenia thanks to the significant growth
of world copper and molybdenum prices. In addition, devaluation of the
Armenian dram against the US dollar has also had a positive impact on
export opportunities of the country, IMF Resident Representative said.

GREATEST GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS PROGRESS RECORDED

IN ARMENIA FOR MACROECONOMIC STABILITY
ARKA
September 9, 2009
Yerevan

YEREVAN, September 9. /ARKA/. In terms of global competitiveness
components Armenia showed the greatest progress for macroeconomic
stability, Chairman of "Economy and Values" research center Manuk
Yerghnyan reported.

The country improved its macroeconomic stability position by 30 points
and is now the 53rd.

This may sound strange, but everything will be clearer if macroeconomic
situation in other countries is considered, Yerghnyan said in Novosti
International Press Center.

The global competitiveness is assessed based on 12 main components -
institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, health and
primary education, higher education and training, commodities market
efficiency, labor market efficiency, financial market efficiency,
technological preparation level, domestic volume, innovations and
business improvement.

Armenia showed one-point improvement on institutions and became
the 95th. In terms of infrastructures the country is now the 81st
(an improvement of 9 points).

The country's position of some other components was as follows: health
and primary education (still 97th), higher education and training
(2-point down to 96th position), commodities' market efficiency
(6 point down to 116th position).

The latter is the weakest point of Armenia due to market
monopolization, the expert said.

The country's position o n labor market efficiency remains the best
(47th) despite a 2-point reduction.

Progress by 10, 7, 2 and 8 points was recorded on financial market
efficiency (97th position), technological preparation level (105),
market volume (109) and business improvement (112).

Armenia recorded a 2-point fall on innovations and ranked the 108th,
Yerghnyan said.

According to the global competitiveness report prepared by World
Economic Forum for 2009-2010 Armenia remains the 97th among 133
countries in terms of world competitiveness in 2009.

RA BUDGETED DEFICIT NOT TO EXCEED 7.5%
PanARMENIAN.NET
09.09.2009 13:36 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Budgeted deficit not to exceed 7.5% in Armenia,
according to IMF forecast.

"Six months ago the Armenian government was concerned over the deficit
index, since the volume of tax flows has considerably reduced. This
led to arrears in wage and pension payment," said Ms. Nienke Oomes,
IMF Resident Representative in Armenia.

"Nevertheless, successful talks between the Armenian government
and international structures allowed financing budgeted deficit
in 2009. At that, IMF will allocate $155 million, World Bank - $60
million and ADB - $80 million," she said.

ARMAVIA'S FIRST SUKHOY SUPERJET S-100 TO ARRIVE IN

ARMENIA BY END OF YEAR
ARKA
September 9, 2009
Yerevan

YEREVAN, September 9. /ARKA/. The first civil aircraft Sukhoy Superjet
S-100 of Armavia air company is to arrive in Armenia by the end of
this year, deputy head of flights division of Armavia Sergey Khjaratyan
told journalists in Novosti international press center Tuesday.

The aircraft delivery has been postponed for many times for technical
and financial reasons, Kharatyan said.

The fuselage is completely ready, but engines are delayed due to
financial problems of the producer.

According to the preliminary deadlines, the aircraft will be
received on December 8 and will be taken over by the end of the year,
Kharatyan said.

Kharatyan pointed out that the company agreed about delivery of another
2 Superjet S-100 aircrafts; another 3 airplanes are "reserved" and
will be delivered if required.

According to a preliminary agreement, Sukhoy Superjet S-100 was
to arrive in Armenia in late August - early September to adapt to
mountainous climate conditions.

Armavia is to become one of the first air companies to buy two new
Sukoy Superjet S-100 airplanes.

Armavia air company is a member of International Air Transport
Association (IATA).

The company operates about 250 flights a month to countries of the
CIS, Middle East and Europe. In 2008, the company transported about
647,000 passengers. The aircraft flee t of the company contains two
A320, three A319, a Tu-134 and an Il-86.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 short-range aircraft developed by "Civil
Aircrafts of Sukhoy" together with Boeing, is for transportation of
98 passengers over a distance of up to 4,400 kilometers. The first
Superjet 100 was presented on September 26 2007 at the factory in
Komsomolk-on-Amur. There the airliner carried out its first flight
on May 19 2008.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~