Wednesday, 1 September 2010

Armenian News

Scotsman
No Turkish Delight
29 July 2010


APPARENTLY I make our Prime Minister "angry'" for daring to question
whether Turkey should become a member of the European Union
(your report, 28 July).

Mr Cameron seems certain that allowing Turkey into the EU would bring
greater prosperity and stability.

Has he considered what will happen if the more extreme Islamic parties
get control in Turkey? Does it even bother him that it is still a crime in
Turkey to call the massacre of more than a million Armenians "genocide"?
What about the plight of the Kurds? Or of Christians in Turkey?

It is easy enough to lecture Israel from the safety of Turkey. I would have
a lot more respect for our Prime Minister if he had the courage to insist
that Turkey offered real democracy, freedom of religion and apologised
for its repressive and authoritarian past.


DAVID A ROBERTSON
Shamrock Street
Dundee

TURKISH PROFESSOR DISAVOWS ARMENIANS' COMPENSATION
RIGHTS
Hurriyet
Aug 17 2010
Turkey

Armenians cannot demand compensation from Turkey for property they
lost during the end of the Ottoman period, the head of the Turkish
Historical Society has said, arguing that the matter was closed in
the 1930s.

The compensation issue ended after the payment of $900,000 by Turkey
in 1934 as a result of an agreement signed by Turkey and the United
States, Professor Kemal Cicek, head of the Armenian Studies Desk at
the Turkish Historical Society, told Anatolia news agency on Monday.

Regarding claims that buildings like the Cankaya Presidential Palace
and the Erzurum Congress Building were Armenian properties, Cicek said:
"Documents on the history of the buildings are found in the archives
of Cankaya Palace. The issue has ended for us."

Regarding compensation suits filed by two Armenians living in the
United States, Cicek said they had documents obtained from Turkish
and American archives.

"These suits don't have legal validity," he said. "Because according
to my research, commissions were established in the United States and
Turkey on the compensation demands of Armenians during the period
between the Treaty of Lausanne [in 1923] and 1937. The commissions
put an end to these demands under an international agreement."

Commenting on the statements that the records of the properties that
Armenians claim were seized were lost, Cicek said: "The Armenians
that left had their properties recorded and it was required to send
a copy of these records to the center. We cannot know whether they
were sent or not during times of war. Some of these records may be
at revenue offices or at the depots of provinces or townships. This
requires extensive research."

However, these are not, as claimed, in the Ottoman archives,
Cicek said.

"There is no secrecy and there is no reason to keep these records
secret. Considering that this issue was closed with the Treaty of
Lausanne and the compensation agreement, there is no reason to keep
these records secret," he said. "These may have been damaged during
the war, like many other documents. Their surfacing would not be
disadvantageous to Turkey, as some claim."
TURKEY LIFTS BAN TO ALLOW MASS AT MONASTERY
By David O'Byrne
FT
August 15 2010 22:18
Istanbul


Five hundred Greek orthodox Christians have celebrated mass in the
beautiful 1,600-year-old Sumela monastery in north-eastern Turkey,
ending an 88-year ban on religious services at the site.

Conducted by Greek Orthodox Patriarch Dimitri Bartholomew I, the
mass attracted orthodox Christians from Greece, Russia, Georgia,
the US and Turkey to the monastery that sits on a ledge high in a
cliff inland from the Turkish Black Sea port of Trabzon

The mass was conducted with the blessing of Turkey's ministry of
culture, which has funded an extensive restoration of the monastery
that until a decade ago was in an advanced state of dereliction.

The event, which was televised live around the world, occurred in
contrast to attempts made last year to hold an orthodox mass at the
site that were halted by ministry officials intent on upholding a
ban on religious services at the monastery.

That ban was imposed in 1923 after the monastery was designated as a
museum, following its abandonment by the local Pontic Greek population,
which had moved to Greece as part of population swap that also saw
Greek Muslims move to Turkey.

Bad publicity from last year's events convinced the Turkish government
of Recep Tayyip Erdogan to ease restrictions on religious services
at historic churches with the aim of both improving relations with
Turkey's neighbours and giving a much-needed boost to Turkey's bid
for European Union membership.

The lifting of the ban will also see the celebration of mass at
the Armenian Cathedral of the Holy Cross on the island of Akhtamar,
in Lake Van in eastern Turkey, on September 19 - the first time a
religious service has been held in the church since 1915.

While hotel owners in Trabzon, the nearest city to Sumela, were
reported as being happy with the business the mass has brought, two
locals were reported as having been arrested for issuing warnings
via the social networking site Facebook that they planned to disrupt
the service.

Although neither has been named, one was reported as being an
official in the local branch of Turkey's Nationalist Action party,
a far-right political party that often conducts demonstrations outside
the headquarters of the Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul.
PRESS RELEASE
August 15, 2010
Land and Culture Organization
DIASPORA AND ARMENIA VOLUNTEERS EXPERIENCING THE
LAND AND CULTURE


Yeghvard/Shirakamut, Armenia - The Land and Culture Organization (LCO-USA),
Organisation Terre and Culture (OTC-France) and Yergeer Yev
Meshagiut-Armenia annual summer campaign is in full swing. During the
months of July and August 37 dedicated volunteers from Armenia, Canada,
England, France, Syria, and the United States have been hard at work
restoring two ancient Armenian churches.

This summer, LCO is restoring the 17th Century Sourp Astvatzatzin Church in
the Yeghvard village in the southern Syunik province on the border of
Armenia and the liberated areas surrounding Artsakh. This renovation
project began in 2007 and will continue until its completion in 2011.
Volunteers have been restoring the interior of the church and its altar, as
well as clearing around its exterior and digging out khatchkars (stone
crosses) and memorials on the church's complex. As with many ancient
churches throughout Armenia, these religious sites had been closed and
neglected during the Soviet period

The second site is the Tchitchkhanavank Monastery in the village of
Shirakamut in the northern Lori Province near Spitak. Tchitchkhanavank was
built on the plan of a Christian cross, typical to the sixth and seventh
centuries. This church was partially destroyed by an earthquake in 1926,
neglected during the Soviet era, and again suffering destruction by the 1988
earthquake. In 2008 and 2009, LCO began the archaeological excavations,
which revealed the church's foundation along with ancient tombstones and
objects of archaeological interest. This summer, volunteers will begin the
renovation and construction of the foundation walls of the church.
Historical experts, skilled craftsmen, and LCO Board Members are overseeing
both restorations.

This has not been the typical Armenia vacation for the volunteers from the
Diaspora and Yerevan or a quiet summer for the local residents. Volunteers
have been living in the village and experiencing the sites and sounds of
farm life. This has given all of them an appreciation of the challenges and
joys that rural remote Armenian villages and their residents face. The
volunteers have personally become more enriched having had the opportunity
to participate in preserving the Armenian heritage and living among the
people of Armenia.

For the villagers, they are moved that Armenian youth from the Diaspora have
given their time and dedication to a project off the beaten path where they
do not have any personal connections, except for being Armenian and wanting
to give back to their ancestral nation. The village children especially
become energized and excited assisting the volunteers in the work and
inviting them to play. LCO-USA President Haig Manjikian reflected, `Armenia
and the Diaspora are a family tree with Armenia being our roots and the
Spiurk its leaves. Both are equally important and need to be nurtured. If
together, we care for the roots, the tree can survive.'

Aside from bonding with the land and locals, volunteers have also been
touring historical sites throughout Armenia and Karabakh. On weekends, they
have enjoyed excursions to Khor Virab, Zorats Karer/Karahunj, Noravank,
Vahanavank, Hovanavank, the regional capital city of Kapan, and other
Armenia landmarks restored by LCO such as the Tatev Monastery and
Saghmosavank. In Karabakh, they visited the cities of Shushi and
Stepanakert, as well as previous LCO/OTC renovation projects of the
community center and schoolhouse of Karintak and the entire third floor and
operating rooms of the Shushi Central Regional Hospital. The village of
Karintak played a pivotal role in the securing of Shushi, and the hospital
has been serving the health needs of the residents of the region. In
addition, LCO Board Members have been actively searching prospective sites
for upcoming campaigns.

Besides the Yeghvard and Shirakamut sites, OTC is participating in a joint
venture project with the sister cities of Vienne, France and Goris, Armenia
renovating the 7th Century Sourp Hripsime Church near the pagan era caves in
Old Goris. An additional 23 Armenian and non-Armenian volunteers from the
Vienne community have committed themselves to this project.

For over 30 years, LCO has been one of the earliest volunteers groups in
Armenia and Karabakh working to restore, renovate, and rejuvenate the
historical monuments and sites of our nation. It has performed this mission
through its summer campaigns, by volunteers of every age from the Diaspora
and Armenia.

To help our mission or join in our summer volunteer program, you may reach
us at www.lcousa.org.


SOUTHAMPTON SCREENS FILM ABOUT MEDIEVAL FOUNDER BEVOIS
CONTINUE READING THE MAIN STORY
BBC
16.8.10

About 300 guests are expected to attend the premiere in the city

Southampton's knight at the movies A film about the legendary 10th
Century founder of Southampton, Sir Bevois, is being screened in
the city.

The 15-minute film, To Unwill a Heart, used local actors and was shot
around the city's medieval landmarks.

It was developed by film staff and historians at Southampton Solent
University.

The film was also shown at the Cannes Short Film Corner, part of the
international film festival.

Writer and director Gela Jenssen researched the legend of Sir Bevois,
who was the the son of Sir Guy, Earl of Hampton.

Ms Jenssen used historical documents recounting storytellers' accounts
of Sir Bevois' adventures.

Two lions

They include being sold to slave merchants by his mother, ending up in
the court of the king of Armenia and falling in love with a princess.

He reputedly returned to England to reclaim his father's land, and
founded the city of Southampton.

Cast and crew will be among 300 guests attending the premiere at the
Harbour Lights Picturehouse later.

Ms Jenssen said: "It's exciting to show the film to the people
of Southampton, get their reaction - many of them don't recognise
the legend.

"After hundreds of years, the story deserves to be told."

The production team is also submitting ideas for a feature length
version to several film companies.

Although the authenticity of the legend is debated, the two stone
lions at the city's Bargate represent two lions the knight is reputed
to have slain.
BRANDY PRODUCTION IN ARMENIA MAY REACH PRE-CRISIS
LEVEL OF 2008 IN 2010
ArmInfo
2010-08-17 15:35:00


ArmInfo. Brandy production in Armenia may reach the pre-crisis level
of 2008 - 15.961 million liters in 2010, Avag Haroutiunyan, Chairman
of the Union of Armenian Winemakers, told ArmInfo.

He said that upward trends have been observed since the beginning of
2010 after the crisis-induced decline in production within 2009.

Traditional markets began recovering.

"The highest production growth is forecasted in November-December
2010. Production will grew more than 50% at the end of the year versus
the same period of 2009 and may reach the pre-crisis level of 2008,"
he said.

Statistics say that brandy production in Armenia for Jan-Jun 2010 grew
45.9% versus the same period of 2009 to 4611.2 thousand liters. The key
sales markets of Armenian brandy are Russia and Ukraine. The global
crisis-induced production of Armenian brandy fell 38.4% in 2009 to
9.869 million liters. The share of the Yerevan Brandy Company in
total production and export of brandy is the biggest.
ABOUT 2500 BOOKS ARE BEING ANNUALLY PRINTED IN ARMENIA
ARMENPRESS
AUGUST 17, 2010
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, AUGUST 17, ARMENPRESS; About 2500 books are being annually
printed in 70 printing houses functioning in Armenia of which 70-80
in the printing house of the Armenian Writers' Union. Chairman of
the Armenian Writers' Union Levon Ananyan said it is a quite large
index for the small number of population of Armenia. About 3000 of
the printed books are state funded. Ananyan said the state-funded
books are of two types - financed fully and partially - 40-60
percent. Levon Ananyan said state budget releases 140 million AMD
annually for printing.

Two Alerts: Aghtamar Once-off Church Service & National Geographic Magazine

Alert 1:
Message from
Rouben Galichian
Author and Hon. Doctor of the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
I strongly believe that celebrating the Mass in the Church of the Holy Cross in
Aghtamar should be boycotted by ALL Armenians and specially by our religious
leaders.
This is a slap on our face. Allow a mass to be celebrated in a museum (which
Aghtamar now is!), just by sticking a cross on it for the day and removing the next
day and claiming they are an open and free society. I was recently in Aghtamar
and there is no mention of the world "Armenian" anywhere on the signs and
descriptions. Before allowing a mass to be celebrated, the Turkish authorities
should change the signs on all Armenian monuments and the history books used
in the schools and clearly state that this, as well as most of the other churches in
the territory of modern Turkey, are Armenian.
This is simply a propaganda a ploy by Turkey, like all their other similar
"reconciliatory" gestures, and regretfully our authorities all over the world fall into
their trap and fail to use it to our advantage.
Alert 2:
National Geographic Magazine
August 2010 Edition, Vol 218 No 2
The New Silk Road, from page 54.
The latest edition of this otherwise respected magazine has an article on the
construction and geography of the new Baku-Tiblisi-Kars (BTK) railroad. It does
not include Armenia in its reporting but does make comments on the political
circumstances of this project.
Even then, it has decided to include a couple of pictures that I think convey a wrong
impression and contains one glaring error. It could only have come from a Turkic
propaganda source that was unchecked. It also in fairness mentions that Armenia
has been excluded in economic developments by the other countries in the South
Caucusus region.
I hope that the following extracts may drive you to write to the magazine in protest:
"The BTK railway is the result of an alliance between Turkey, Georgia and
Azerbaijan: neighboring Armenia has deliberately been left out of the party"
"But the Armenians then demanded that Turkey acknowledged that the 1915
massacres of its people constituted genocide which Turkey is loath to do. For
their part, the Turks began insisting on some resolution to the Nagorno-Karabagh
conflict. Since neither is likely to happen anytime soon, the deal - and the
opportunity for rapprochement - collapsed last spring."
[note the use of the word massacres]
"The optimists live in Georgia, the people who are complaining all the time live in
Armenia but the realists live in Azerbaijan (quote from a Turkic source)".
All the while mentioning that prosperity in Azerbaijan does not extend beyond central
Baku!
It you wish to write, you have to include your name, address and daytime phone number
sending the letter to:
post: National Geographic Magazine
PO Box 98199
Washington DC 20090-8199
If it helps, here is a letter that has already been sent:
The Editor
Where in earth did Brett Forrest get the idea that Armenia had imposed a condition
that Turkey should recognise the 1915 Armenian Genocide prior to the Zurich
agreement coming into force? ("The New Silk Road, August 2010, Vol 218 No 2).
The published text of the protocols, Armenian Government statements before and after
the agreement, interviews of the Armenian President, Armenian press releases, all
political commentaries and the public articles state exactly the opposite, that Armenia
wished to establish diplomatic relations without any pre-conditions on either side. A
series of governmental commission would then jointly discuss the issues that concern
the two sides.

Furthermore, the wording of your feature implies that the above condition was first voiced
by the Armenian government after which the Turks imposed their own condition, the
resolution of the Karabagh issue where the Karabaghis had exercised their right to
self-determination of their status. Pre-conditions are unilateral from one side, and from
newspaper reports arose after Azerbaijan imposed on Turkey to progress its own bilateral
conflict with Armenia.
Why did your reporter make such an erroneous point that could so easily have been
checked out using public sources? It would at least be a basic courtesy for the National
Geographic Magazine correct their record immediately.

I also note the subliminal message from juxtaposing in the last three pictures the image
of an old, unhappy Azeri displaced person with the happy wedding of a well-off looking
couple in Armenia and an image of your perception of truimphalism in Karabagh.
The 800,000 refugees that you mention also include Armenians fleeing in the opposite
to Armenia from Azerbaijani Sumgait and Baku pogroms against the Armenian
residents in that country.

This article is laden with political messages from unchecked sources that are unbecoming
your publication.
Yours sincerely

Sabre rattling in the Caucusus?

TURKEY'S GUL VISITS AZERBAIJAN: A CASE OF SOUND AND FURY?
EurasiaNet
Aug 17 2010
NY


Turkish President Abdullah Gul ended a two-day official visit to Baku
on August 17 with the signing of a strategic partnership agreement,
but the details remain a guessing game. Local analysts say that they
are left to conclude that the trip, coming a few days before Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Armenia, was meant mostly for
consultations.

At a post-meeting press conference, Gul and Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev only broached the new Agreement on Strategic Partnership and
Mutual Support in general terms. Calling the deal "historic," Aliyev
declared that the agreement defines "the future of [our] bilateral
relations of brotherhood for decades." Gul added that the Agreement
will let the two countries reinforce and develop "our solidarity."

Despite those descriptions, the text of the agreement has not yet
been published - for reasons that remain unclear.

The possibility of joint foreign investments in third countries was
one form of partnership Aliyev identified, but Azerbaijan's ongoing
conflict with Armenia over the breakaway region of Nagorno Karabakh
is an area where some observers looked more sharply for cooperation.

Neither leader, however, had anything new to state on the topic
to reporters.

Gul repeated earlier statements about the need to liberate Azerbaijan's
occupied territories; Aliyev, once again, predicted that the talks
with Yerevan over Karabakh could end soon if "Armenia will take a
constructive position and would respect international law."

Baku political analyst Elhan Shahinoglu, head of the Atlas think-tank,
believes that Gul's visit served more for consultations on regional
problems than for hammering out detailed plans of action on Karabakh
or other issues. "And, of course, it served to show that earlier
serious problems between Ankara and Baku are completely overcame,"
Shahinoglu commented in reference to past differences with Turkey
over Turkish reconciliation with Armenia and gas delivery to Europe.

Making that show might appear to come at a critical time for Baku.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is scheduled to travel to Yerevan
on August 19 and to sign a 49-year lease agreement on a Russian base
in Armenia. [For details, see the EurasiaNet.org archive.]

Neither Shahinoglu nor other Azerbaijani analysts interviewed by
EurasiaNet.org believed, however, that any link exists between
Medvedev's upcoming visit and Gul's appearance in Baku. The Russian
leader is also expected to travel to Azerbaijan sometime in September.

Nonetheless, Gul and Aliyev most likely discussed what "adequate
steps" Baku could take in response to Moscow's proposed base deal
with Armenia, Shahinoglu said.

"The deepening of military cooperation between Azerbaijan and Turkey
is now especially important for Baku. It does not mean that Turkey
will deploy a military base in Azerbaijan soon. But some steps could
be taken . . ." he elaborated.

Analyst Zardusht Alizade contends that Gul most likely pushed Aliyev
for some form of agreement with Armenia as a means for moving ahead
toward a resolution of the 22-year conflict.

But Rasim Musabekov, another Baku-based political analyst, believes
that Baku maintained its objections to any reopening of Turkey's border
with Armenia as a way to advance such an agreement. While Aliyev may
have expected some firm statement of support for Azerbaijan from
Gul during the visit, "I did not hear anything new in the Turkish
president's public statements," Musabekov said.

Aside from "long-term peace in the Caucasus," the Turkish presidency's
website named energy as another topic for discussion with Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev, but the issue vanished from public view during
Gul's trip.

Eliminating Azerbaijan's visa requirements for Turkish citizens was
another topic earlier named by Ankara. Turkey unilaterally scrapped
its visa requirement for Azerbaijan in 2009 and expects a similar
step from Baku. The issue received only a sliver more of attention
at the press conference, however.

Responding to a Turkish reporter, Aliyev said that "this issue has
to be resolved via internal technical procedures in Azerbaijan."

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov named a similar problem
in December 2009.

"It's difficult to believe that Baku was not able to solve it during
eight months," Shahinoglu commented about the red-tape snags.

Rather, Shahinoglu believes that Iran is the reason for Baku's
hesitation. Earlier this year, Iran unilaterally eliminated its visa
requirements for Azerbaijan. [For details, see the EurasiaNet.org
archive.]

"If Baku does it with Turkey, then Iran will expect similar steps,"
Shahinoglu noted. "But the Azerbaijani government does not want to
have a visa-free regime with the Iranians."

Does that mean a fresh tussle to come between the South Caucasus'
regional players? Don't look for it in the near future. "Generally
I do not think that this visit has seriously changed anything in
current regional geopolitics," Musabekov said.

Editor's note: Shahin Abbasov is a freelance correspondent
based in Baku. He is also a board member of the Open Society
Institute-Azerbaijan.
RUSSIAN-ARMENIAN DEFENSE PACT 'WILL AVERT NEW WAR
IN KARABAKH'
Ruzanna Stepanian
Armenialiberty.org
Aug 17 2010


Armenia's deepening military cooperation with Russia will cement the
balance of forces in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and discourage
Azerbaijan from attempting to resolve it by force, President Serzh
Sarkisian's Republican Party (HHK) said on Tuesday.

Sarkisian and his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, are expected to
sign significant amendments to a 1995 treaty regulating the presence
of a Russian military base in Armenia after talks in Yerevan later
this week.

The amendments will extend Russia's basing rights by 24 years, to 2044,
and upgrade the mission of its troops headquartered in Gyumri.

They stipulate that the troops will be supposed to not only protect
"interests of the Russian Federation" but also "ensure the security
of the Republic of Armenia" jointly with the Armenian army. They
also commit Russia to supplying its regional ally with "modern and
compatible weaponry and special military hardware."

Eduard Sharmazanov, the spokesman for the ruling HHK, confirmed that
Armenia is reinforcing its military alliance with Russia in response
to Azerbaijan's ongoing military build-up and regular war threats.

"If we want to have adequate national security, especially considering
statements made by our eastern and western neighbors, we need to
be able to develop counterbalancing mechanisms," he told a news
conference. "And I think that the agreement to extend the deployment
of that base is also aimed at ensuring the balance of forces."

Sharmazanov claimed that the new defense pact will "practically rule
out a military solution to the Karabakh problem." "That is important
not only for the Republic of Armenia but also long-term peace and
stability in the region," he said.

Speaking to RFE/RL's Armenian service on Friday, Razmik Zohrabian,
an HHK deputy chairman, said that the amended treat will oblige Moscow
to support the Armenian side in case of renewed fighting in Karabakh.

Armenian critics of the deal, among them some opposition politicians,
dismiss such claims, arguing that a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war
would unfold in Karabakh and surrounding territories that are not
an internationally recognized part of Armenia. They are worried that
Armenia would only become even more dependent on Russia.

Sharmazanov rejected the criticism as "inappropriate and populist."
He insisted that the treaty amendments will be good for Armenia.

AZERBAIJAN 500 TIMES FIRED AT KARABAKH POSITIONS
WITHIN TWO DAYS
news.am
Aug 17 2010
Armenia


On August 14-16, 32 ceasefire violations by the Azerbaijani side
were registered in the contact line between the Azerbaijani and NKR
armed forces.

The Azerbaijani units over 500 times sniped at the Karabakh positions
in the Hadrut, Martuni, Askeran and Martakert regions, NKR Ministry
of Defense press service informed NEWS.am. With retaliatory fire the
NKR Defense Army neutralized the enemy.
RASIM MUSABAYOV: TURKEY CAN DEPLOY MILITARY BASE IN
GANJA AND NAKHCHIVAN
AzeriReport
Aug 17 2010
Azerbaijan

BAKU. August 17, 2010: Strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and
Turkey exists since Azerbaijan has gained its independence in 1991,
said Rasim Musabayov, political expert and former foreign policy
adviser to the Azerbaijani president, commenting on the Azeri-Turkish
agreement on strategic partnership and mutual understanding which
was signed yesterday.

Musabayov does not rule out the inclusion of the new provisions on
military and military-technical cooperation to the existing agreement.

Musabayov said it may be an Azeri response to the new Russian-Armenian
Military agreement.

In reality, the presence of the Russian militaryin Armenia will not
increase. "The term of the presence of the Russian military base in
Armenia is 25 years. And the prolongation of the agreement was anyhow
intended by the agreement.

"It was noted that the base serves the Russian interests and the new
provision in the agreement says the military base in that area will
serve the Armenian national interests, as well. However, the base has
already been involved in protecting the Armenian national interests
and half of its personnel are local Armenians," Musabayov said.

Russia cannot threaten Azerbaijan with its base consisting of 5,000
people, and Russia is quite restricted in supplying that military
base. If Armenia and Russia revise their military agreements, then
Turkey and Azerbaijan can do the same. For example, the two countries
have agreement on providing for the security of the pipelines and
this cooperation can be deepened, said Musabayov.

Iran and Armenia already threatened pipelines, and the Russian invasion
to Georgia in 2008 was a real threat for the pipelines.

Turkey can provide the anti-air defense for the pipelines and deploy
its mobile forces in Ganja, Musabayov thinks.

Musabayov thinks that the establishment of the Turkish Military base
in Nakhchivan can be real. "Let Armenia think that its frontiers are
protected, and it can easily send its troops to Garabagh to fight
at Azerbaijan's territory. The establishment of the Turkish base
in Nakhchivan will make Armenians think about protection against
the threats from the Azerbaijani military forces in Nakhchivan,"
Musabayov said.

Speaking about the Garabagh negotiations, the expert said the Russian
attempts to distance from previously agreed Madrid Principles during
the St. Petersburg meetings showed that it was impossible to pressure
Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan reacted immediately, and it was expressed in
issuing a short-term credit to Alexander Lukashenko, Ilham Aliyev's
visit to Georgia and discussing the question on trans-Caspian gas
deliveries without Russia.

Musabayov considers if Russia has interests in Azerbaijan, then
president Dmitry Medvedev in September must have new ideas for
resolving Garabagh conflict. He has to let Azerbaijan know about
those ideas during his visit in September to Baku.

Moreover, in the end of this year a summit of the OSCE will take place
for the first time since 1999, and the work of Minsk Group will be
assessed. In case of progress, this cooperation could be replaced by
other initiatives.

Responding the question on the reasons of absence progress in the
question on eliminating of visa between Azerbaijan and Turkey,
Musabayov said there were certain moments which must be settled.

"Visa regime with Turkey and Iran is connected with the possibility
of having unwanted people entering Azerbaijan from third countries,"
he said. Musabayov said he hoped that a mechanism for preventing such
threats would be found, and visa regime with Turkey would be eased up
(Turan).


RUSSIAN MP SEES NO MISSILE SALE TO AZERBAIJAN
Sargis Harutyunyan
Armenialiberty.org
Aug 17 2010

A senior Russian parliamentarian on Tuesday expressed skepticism over
reports that Russia plans to sell sophisticated air-defense systems
to Azerbaijan despite serious concerns in Armenia.

Citing Russian arms industry sources, Russia's "Vedomosti" business
daily reported late last month that Azerbaijan last year signed a
deal with the Rosoboronexport arms exporter to purchase two batteries
of S-300 anti-aircraft systems worth $300 million. A Rosoboronexport
spokesman denied the report, saying that the state-run company "has
no contractual obligations whatsoever on this matter."

The Russian Defense Ministry has declined to confirm or refute it.

Unnamed ministry officials have been quoted by Russian media as making
conflicting statements about the veracity of the information.

In a phone interview with RFE/RL's Armenian service, Konstantin
Zatulin, the deputy chairman of a Russian State Duma committee on
former Soviet republics, claimed to be unaware of any missile deals
struck by Moscow and Baku.

"I don't think that such developments will occur anytime soon,
especially given that Azerbaijan .... is stepping up its militaristic
rhetoric," he said. "It's a bad moment for supplying weaponry to a
country that's making such statements."

Zatulin argued that although Russian-Azerbaijani relations are
presently "good," Moscow is "categorically against the resumption of
hostilities and attempts to solve the Karabakh conflict by military
means." "I am convinced that the Russian Federation will use all
possible methods of preventing an escalation or resumption of
hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh," he said.

Originally designed in the late 1970s and repeatedly upgraded since
then, the S-300 system is widely regarded as one of the world's
most potent anti-aircraft weapons. Its surface-to-air missiles have a
firing range of up to 200 kilometers, and its radars can simultaneously
track up to 100 targets, including both aircraft and cruise missiles.

Russia deployed at least one battery of S-300s at its military base
in Armenia in the late 1990s, significantly reinforcing the country's
air defenses. The two countries have since been jointly protecting
Armenia's airspace.

Zatulin, who also runs a Kremlin-linked think-tank in Moscow and
specializes in the South Caucasus, underlined the importance of
an upcoming agreement that will deepen Russian-Armenian military
cooperation. "In all likelihood, there is a need to both underline
the enduring value of Russian-Armenian relations and complement this
document with new content," he said, commenting on Moscow's motives.

"In the existing situation in the South Caucasus, it is
extremely important that there be no doubts about the strength of
Russian-Armenian ties, since there are quite a lot of insinuations on
this score and the development of Armenia's relations with Azerbaijan
and Turkey leaves much to be de desired," added the lawmaker.

The deal, which will take the form of amendments to a 1995
Russian-Armenian defense treaty, will commit the Russians' to supplying
more modern weaponry to the Armenian military.

Asked just how significant fresh Russian arms supplies are likely to
be, Zatulin replied, "In my view, one should get the answer [to this
question] from the Armenian side in the first instance, one should
hear the opinion of Armenian military officials. Do they think they
are satisfied with cooperation with Russia?"

Zatulin asserted in that context that Russian military assistance
to Armenia helped to stop the war in Karabakh in 1994 and prevented
its resumption. "I think that our cooperation is developing very
positively, and, as a rule, Armenian military officials are welcome
guests in Russia, both at military academies and those enterprises
that produce military hardware," he said.
What Game Theory Can Tell Us About a Possible Armenian
-Azerbaijani Conflict
August 18, 2010
Nicholas Clayton


Nicholas Clayton lives in Tbilisi, Georgia and works as a professor of
journalism and a freelance reporter covering the Caucasus. Having
studied NATO-Russian relations at Hertzen University in St.
Petersburg, Russia in 2007, Clayton began blogging about the
geo-politics ...
Read more about Nicholas Clayton ->

The four-year-old International School of Economics at Tbilisi State
University (ISET) in Tbilisi, Georgia was founded to unite students
and faculty from all three South Caucasus countries for a
Western-style education in economics. And, as if undergoing a rite of
passage in its growth as an institution, it underwent its first major
academic controversy this year.


Students were agitated, donors threatened to withdraw funding and an
ambassador warned of unilateral sanctions.

What caused all the fuss? — A master’s thesis that used game theory to
create a model for the probability of war between Armenia and
Azerbaijan.

Ani Harutyunyan, 23, originally of Vanadzor, Armenia, set out last
November to create a model that could determine the probability of
all-out war breaking out between the two countries over the disputed
territory of Nagorno-Karabakh based on a variety of factors.

Now, mind you, creating a game theory model is not the same as
predicting whether war will happen or not – it’s not a magic eight
ball.

Basically it works like this: say you are hungry and the two main
factors governing your action are price of the food and deliciousness
of the food. You have three options to choose from:

1.) Don’t eat. You save your money, but you don’t resolve the problem.

2.) Throw something together at home. You expend very little money,
but, although your bachelor-pad-borne concoction is filling, it’s
hardly gourmet.

3.) Go out to eat. You’ll have to pony up some dough, but you’ll get
some good food out of it.

And so, if you make a formula out of those choices and input
subjective number values for your culinary pickiness and current level
of poverty, one can compute which action you are most likely to take.

Harutyunyan’s thesis created the formula for the major factors that
would play into what Azerbaijan would demand as a settlement in the
peace negotiations and what Armenia would be willing to accept, with
renewed war being the probable result of a total deadlock; but she did
not input her own subjective numbers to find a result. As Harutyunyan
put it, “unlike journalists, scientists never make conclusions
explicitly” (like I did earlier this month).

Nonetheless, her model and the thesis’ conclusions are quite interesting.

The basis of the model puts the Defender (Armenia) at the negotiating
table with the Challenger (Azerbaijan). Because Armenia currently
holds the territory that Azerbaijan wants, it is more or less
satisfied with the status quo and is less likely to make a deal in
which it sacrifices territory unless it is facing a war it thinks it
will lose.

Azerbaijan wants the territory, but in assessing the war option it
must decide if the costs of fighting the war are worth the benefits of
potentially regaining control of Nagorno-Karabakh and other
territories currently held by Armenia. The more Armenia believes
Azerbaijan, which is more powerful militarily, is willing to go to
war, the more amenable it will be towards cutting a deal.

The X-factor is the potential for third-party intervention as both
Armenia and Azerbaijan have much larger allies in the region – Russia
and Turkey respectively. The mood of each nation towards intervention
on a scale of “reluctant” to “motivated” then factors into each side’s
stance.

However, the most important factor in the formula — as in most wars —
is information. The study found that “there is no risk of war when
disputants are perfectly informed about each other’s costs, the
distribution of power, utilities for different outcomes.”

“However,” the paper continues, “states are rarely informed about each
other completely.”

The paper also presupposes logical thinking on both sides, as well as
the audience, which may have been a stretch.

As Harutyunyan presented her thesis this May to a mixed audience of
Georgians, Armenians and Azeris in Tbilisi, she got heckles and
interruptions – mostly from Azeri students objecting to a map used in
the presentation which showed Nagorno-Karabakh and other Armenian-held
territories shaded a different color from Azerbaijan. Some students
shot video with their cell phones, although the university was filming
the presentation as well.

When it came time for group discussion the room was silent. The
shouting would start a few days later.

Karine Torosyan, a professor of economics at ISET, said that some
students complained to school advisors and within days the university
received a letter from the embassy of Azerbaijan in Georgia demanding
Harutyunyan rewrite her thesis on a different topic or Azerbaijan
would take steps to prevent Azeri students from attending ISET and
would impede the school’s activities in the country.

Furthermore, the school, which is supported by British Petroleum, the
World Bank and various other organizations and governments, began
receiving calls from donors expressing concern over the thesis,
intimating that future grants and donations hung in the balance.

Torosyan said the university held a series of meetings with concerned
embassy officials, who said they believed in freedom of speech, but
wanted the university to guard against “uncivilized discourse.”

ISET didn’t budge.

In the end, the university agreed to set up a faculty academic
integrity committee to deal with future controversies but accepted the
thesis and awarded Harutyunyan her master’s degree.

Torosyan said the university has not faced any consequences thus far
from the Azerbaijani government or independent donors, but the fact
that such a risk remained was “very embarrassing” for academia in the
region.

In some ways, the reaction to Harutyunyan’s thesis tells nearly as
much about the potential for resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict as the thesis itself. The issue is so sensitive that the
roles could have easily been switched. Had the paper been written by
an Azeri student and presented with a map that showed Karabakh and the
other territories shaded the same color as Azerbaijan, it’s likely it
would have received a similarly dismissive and off-put reaction from
Armenians.

But Harutyunyan, for her part, said she reflects unfazed by the
controversy that could have cost her her MA.

“Come on, it was funny for me all that,” she said. “What can I think?
You wrote something, you are open for discussion, you want to reveal
things, but then you are told to shut up

Aghtamar Church Service

WHY WOULD ARMENIANS GO TO AKHTAMAR AND BECOME
TOOLS OF TURKISH PROPAGANDA?
Harut Sassounian
Tert.am
18.08.10


Ever since the Genocide, after nearly a century of banning Armenian
church services, the Turkish government has finally decided to allow
a one-time celebration of Mass to be held at the 10th Century Holy
Cross Church on Akhtamar Island.

Questions have been raised about the prudence of attending the Sept.
19 church services to which the Turkish government has invited
Armenians from around the world, members of the international media
and foreign Ambassadors and dignitaries. Those calling for a boycott
indicate that the true aim of the Turkish authorities is to score
propaganda points with the European Union and the United States,
by feigning tolerance towards Christians and other minorities. In
reality, successive Turkish governments have carried out a systematic
policy of eliminating all visible signs of Armenian presence throughout
Western Armenia (Eastern Turkey) for over nine decades, during which
more than 2,000 Armenian churches and monasteries have been destroyed
or converted into non-religious use. The Holy Cross Church itself
was targeted for demolition some years ago, but was saved by the
intervention of a local Turkish official.

Critics of those traveling to Akhtamar also object to the Turkish
government's classification of the historic church as a "museum,"
and holding services only once a year. After many requests and
complaints, Turkish officials have finally promised to place a cross
on the church's dome.

There is no reason for Armenians to be grateful to a country that,
after confiscating and destroying thousands of churches, is now
allowing a religious ceremony in a single church, which it classifies
as a museum. This church and thousands of others should belong to
the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul, and services should be held
as needed, without governmental permission or interference.

Last week, tempers flared in Armenia when the Holy See of Etchmiadzin
announced its intention to send two clergymen to the Sept. 19
ceremonies. His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II usually consults with
Armenian officials before taking decisions on matters involving foreign
countries. Since he was absent from Armenia while this announcement
was made and possibly unaware of the objections raised, His Holiness
now has the opportunity to make a final determination regarding the
sending of representatives of the Holy See to Akhtamar.

As Armenians in Turkey are not permitted to freely express their
views, Church officials and lay leaders outside Turkey should take the
initiative to condemn the Turkish exploitation of Armenian religious
ceremonies.

The Foreign Ministry of Armenia announced that it has not received an
official invitation from Ankara to send a delegation to the Holy Cross
Church. It is hoped that if and when such an invitation is extended,
the Armenian government would reject it. Yerevan handed the Turks a
propaganda victory last year by signing the Armenia-Turkey Protocols.

Participating in the Akhtamar church services would be tantamount to
presenting the Turks an undeserved additional reward.

There are indications, however, that this time around the Armenian
government may not be as accommodating. Eduard Sharmazanov, spokesman
of Pres. Sargsyan's ruling Republican Party and Member of Parliament,
harshly criticized the planned church services, calling it a "publicity
stunt" and a "provocation" to mislead the international community.

In addition, a subcommittee of the Public Council, an advisory
body formed by Pres. Sargsyan, issued a statement, urging
Armenians to boycott the Holy Cross church services. It called
on all self-respecting Armenians to refrain from participating in
"this cheap Turkish show." Giro Manoyan, spokesman of the opposition
Armenian Revolutionary Federation in Yerevan, also advocated boycotting
the church services and criticized the Holy See of Etchmiadzin for
planning to send two clerics to Akhtamar.

A clear indication of Turkish disinterest in preserving Armenian
churches is the interrogation by the secret police of several thousand
families who have offered to host Armenian visitors in nearby city of
Van on September 19, due to shortage of hotel rooms. Turkish officials
are suspicious that host families may be forcefully Turkified or
Kurdified remnants of Armenian Genocide victims. By this appalling
action, reminiscent of Nazi Germany's Gestapo tactics, the Turkish
regime is showing its obsession to keep track of its citizens' ethnic
origin. In fact, after this racist investigation, a number of families
have been officially banned from hosting Diaspora Armenians in Van.

Armenians who naively plan to attend religious ceremonies in "a museum"
would inadvertently legitimize the confiscation of a historic Armenian
Church and promote a political show staged by Turkish authorities.

It is perfectly understandable that Turkish leaders would want
to create a positive image in order to facilitate their country's
entry into the European Union, and counter Armenian efforts for the
international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It is far less
understandable, however, why Armenians would help advance the Turks'
anti-Armenian objectives.


ONLY ARMENIAN COMMUNITY OF ISTANBUL IS ENTITLED TO
DECIDE ANYTHING ABOUT THE LITURGY ON AKHTAMAR
PanARMENIAN.Net
August 17, 2010

Visiting a church is a purely personal matter and nobody has the
right to prohibit or allow attending the liturgy on September 19 in
the Church Holy Cross on Akhtamar.

A month before September 19, when the first liturgy in 95 years is
to be offered in the Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island in Lake
Van, Armenian political establishment has begun an active propaganda
campaign against the presence of Armenians in the worship service. The
arguments, alas, are the same: Armenians are dancing to the Turkish
tune; they promote the positive image of Turkey, and the like.

Of course, there is some truth in such statements, but some
politiciansâ~@~Y calls to ignore the liturgy on Akhtamar are nothing
but an attempt to show themselves holier than the Pope. Of course,
you may not go to Van. You may not go to Western Armenia and may not
see what has remained of the Armenian architecture. Nevertheless,
supporters of the so-called boycott do not know exactly against what
they stand. In our view, a very important fact is to be clarified
here. Only the Armenian community of Istanbul has the right to
decide anything about Akhtamar. Only they were granted permission
to offer services in the renovated church once a year. Besides, all
matters regarding the church service, the election of the Patriarch of
Constantinople, and the return of property is decided by the Government
of Turkey and not by that of Armenia or by some public organizations
in Yerevan. In this case, excessive tension is harmful not only for
the Istanbul community, but also for the nation as a whole. Moreover,
without understanding the reasons for the postponement of the day
of worship, some, if I may say so, historians state they will go to
Van when they find it necessary. The most interesting thing is that
one can really go to Van or to Western Armenia (Eastern Anatolia) any
time before September 19. The thing is that certain politicians have
seized a good opportunity to declare themselves as â~@~\patriots who
are concerned about the fate of the Armenian heritage in Turkey.â~@~]
Representative of the subcommittee on issues of Religion, Diaspora and
International Integration of the RA Public Council, Zhasmen Asryan
submitted the subcommitteeâ~@~Ys statement on this matter, which in
particular said that an Armenian with national and religious dignity
should refrain from participating in the liturgy in the Holy Cross
Church. She also reported that in the near future the subcommittee
would submit its declaration to Head of the Public Council Vazgen
Manukyan.

Seriously speaking, visiting a church is a purely personal matter and
nobody has the right to prohibit or allow attending the liturgy on
September 19 in the Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar. Of course, Turkey
needs such steps for her positive image in the world. Any initiative
of the Government in respect of minorities pursues certain goals. What
is interesting is that after 88 years a liturgy was offered in the
Greek Monastery Sumele, which attracted more than 2000 Greek pilgrims
from all over the world. And this fact was properly treated in Greece,
though the Greeks also feel rancor towards Turkey.

So, to go or not to go to Akhtamar on 19 September is a purely personal
matter and it is incorrect, if not to say more, to play with moral
values and almost blame Turkey for authorizing the liturgy. In the
end, every state, including Turkey, does what it considers necessary
and important. Unfortunately, this is also true about the genocide
of Christian nations...


OPINION: IT'S NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN MASS AT SURB
KHACH
Aysor
Aug 18 2010
Armenia

"I am a little concerned over opinions of those who think that we
shouldn't participated in the September 19 Mass that is to be served
at Surb Khach (St Cross) Church" in Akhtamar Ireland, [modern Turkey],
said at the news conference Director of the Center of Globalization
and Regional Cooperation, political scientist, Stepan Grigorian.

"I wonder how the Armenian side can so easily surrender what belonged
to them. I don't want to offend anyone, but this makes me think
whether the church is ours? If it is an Armenian Church, then we must
go there and participate in the Mass," stressed expert.

Turkey is definitely playing its own game but "whether Armenia has no
benefit from this," said Grigorian. "If we don't participate, and turn
to our churches, then they will become Georgian, Byzantian..." he said.

Stepan Grigorian also stressed that for long 70 years neither Armenian
Church was consecrated in Turkey, and under these circumstances the
Mass at Surb Khach Church is a great progress and it's necessary to
participate without doubt.
TOUR OPERATORS GEARING UP TO TAKE ARMENIANS TO
TURKEY MASS
Hurriyet
Aug 17 2010
Turkey


Tourism operators serving diaspora Armenians, as well as members of
the community in Armenia and Istanbul, are organizing special tours
for those wishing to attend a special mass in September on Lake Van.

The sole operator to organize a tour to Van in Armenia, Ani Tour,
is planning to take their customers to the eastern province of Van
for the Sept. 19 service at Surp Hac church on Akdamar Island through
Georgia due to the closed borders between Armenia and Turkey.

The company chose to organize the tours after seeing an increase in
demand since early 2010, Ani Tour Assistant Manager Lusine Garabetyan
recently told the Hurriyet Daily News & Economic Review.

The number of participants had already reached several hundred by July,
he said.

Tour prices start from $395 and are offered as package programs.

Garabetyan said since the land borders are closed it was impossible
for the tour group to reach Turkey without first going through
Georgia. "Therefore, the travel time will take almost a day."

Istanbul Armenians to attend as well

Armenians from Istanbul will also travel to Van during the week after
Sept. 12 via tours organized by Turkey's Armenian Patriarchate.

Armenians from Armenia, on the other hand, will set off Sept. 17
from Yerevan.

Armenians going to Van by bus will return following the same route
on Sept. 22, Garabetyan said, adding that applications to join the
tours were increasing every day and that they were experiencing a
surge in demand.

Not all the Armenians hoping to join the service will visit Turkey on
a tour as a small minority will make their own way to Van via Georgia,
with their own car or by bus.

One of the prospective travelers, Levon Astoyan, said he hoped the
mass would be the beginning of a new era for both Armenia and Turkey.

Thanks to permission granted by the Culture and Tourism Ministry,
the event on Akdamar Island will be the first mass at the church in
almost 95 years.
LRAGIR
TURKEY NEEDS TO PROVE ITS RIGHT
NAIRA HAYRUMYAN
16:00:19 - 18/08/2010


To go or not to go to Akhtamar where on September 19 a mass will
be celebrated in St. Cross Church. Some say Turkey takes this step
to please the European Union; others try to present the issue as if
Turkey is changing and is becoming more democratic. But as soon as
we view the issue from another angle, it becomes clear that Ankara
first of all solves a physiological issue.

The question why Turkey does not recognize the genocide is still
observed on the moral plane. We do not need anything, it's important
for Turkey to recognize the genocide and apologize, many Armenians
say. But they forget that they are in various value-psychological
systems with Turkey, and what is considered a sin on one side, is
perceived as heroism on the other. Armenians cannot help thinking that
the Turks are ashamed of what happened, that they understand what sin
committed, and therefore deny the recognition. But in fact there is no
embarrassment. What Armenians call genocide, deportation, expulsion,
the Turks, proud of their history, call it a breakthrough that gave
them full authority over the new territories. They have nothing to be
ashamed - they are winners. And now they have to prove their victory
at the psychological level. That's why they "allow" ceremonies in
Armenian churches - to show who "allows". They may even be allowed
to hold services every day, if only they were asked to "allow".

If Turkey feels the necessity to prove its right to "allow", then it
has problems connected with the very right. This means that there
is some possibility to dispute this right, but not on the level of
"allowing", but in international instances. When ceremonies in
Akhtamar are held by the decision of the UN International Court,
then Armenians will have to participate in it. To go to Akhtamar
because Turkey allows means to recognize its rights.

Russian Visit to Armenia Articles

ARMENIA EXTENDS RUSSIA'S MILITARY LEASE
By Isabel Gorst in Moscow
August 18 2010 23:25

Armenia has agreed to extend Russia's lease at a Soviet-era military
base on its territory until 2044 citing security concerns.

The deal, to be signed this week in the presence of Dmitry Medvedev,
the Russian president, will bolster Moscow's influence in the South
Caucasus, a corridor for strategic pipelines carrying Caspian oil
and gas to the west.

Armenia's foreign ministry said an agreement allowing Russian forces
to remain at the Gyumri military base until 2044 would be signed this
week when Mr Medvedev visits Yerevan on Thursday and Friday.

"It is a security measure reflecting our strong relationship with
Russia and the security challenges we face," said Tigran Balayan,
spokesman for the foreign ministry, on Wednesday.

Armenia faces a threat of renewed conflict with Azerbaijan over the
disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh which broke away from Azerbaijan
during a violent war in the early 1990s.

Azerbaijan, which is investing part of its oil windfall in boosting its
defense capability, has vowed to win back control of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Under the existing 25 year lease agreement signed in 1995, Russia
stations about 5,000 troops at Gyumri and helps patrol Armenia's
former Soviet boundaries, including its frontiers with Turkey and Iran.

The revised lease will extend Russia's stay for an additional 24 years
and allow Russian forces to protect Armenia's border with Azerbaijan
as well.

Russia has moved to regain military influence in the South Caucasus
since defeating Georgia in a war over Georgia's breakaway regions of
South Ossetia and Abkhazia in 2008.

After the war, Russia recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia and
deployed thousands of troops in the regions.

It also moved to rebalance its relations in the South Caucasus,
building stronger ties with oil-rich Azerbaijan while maintaining
traditionally friendly relations with Armenia.

Russia belongs to an international group that has tried, without
success, to broker a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for
the past 15 years.

The dispute has left landlocked Armenia isolated in the South Caucasus.

Turkey sealed its border with Armenia in 1994 to demonstrate solidarity
with Azerbaijan, its main ally in the region.

Wary of the security risk posed by the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute,
foreign oil companies bypassed Armenia when building oil and gas
pipelines across the South Caucasus in the last decade.
Armenia and Russia have signed inter-governmental agreement on
cooperation for construction of nuclear energy block at the territory
of Armenia
2010-08-20 15:26:00

ArmInfo. Armenian Energy and Natural Resources Minister Armen
Movsisyan and Sergei Kiriyenko, head of the Russian Federal Atomic
Energy Agency, Rosatom signed an inter-governmental nuclear
cooperation agreement in Yerevan today.

As S.Kiriyenko told journalists, Russia is ready to provide more than
20 percent of the funding for the construction of a nuclear power
plant in Armenia. The joint Russian-Armenian company on construction
of the plant has been already set up, which will raise at least 40
percent of the funding for the NPP with 60 percent expected to come
from investors, Kiriyenko said.

Armenia and Russia signed an agreement on having Russian trade
representation in Armenia and Armenian trade representation in Russia


Five documents signed at the extended negotiations between the
Armenian and Russian delegations

YEREVAN, AUGUST 20, ARMENPRESS. Five documents have been signed at the
extended negotiations between the Armenian and Russian delegations
today within the framework of the state visit of the President of the
Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev to Armenia. The signing was
followed after the private meeting between the presidents of the two
countries at the Residence of the President of the RA.

Defense Minister of Armenia Seyran Ohanyan and his Russian counterpart
Anatoly Serdyukov signed a protocol on making changes in the agreement
between Armenia and Russia signed March 16 1995 on location of the
Russian military base in the territory of Armenia.

Energy and Natural Resources Minister Armen Movsisyan and Director
General of the RF `Rosatom' state corporation Sergey Kirienko signed
an agreement on cooperation between the governments of the two
countries on construction of new energy blocks in the territory of the
Armenian Atomic Station.

Economy Minister Nerses Yeritsyan and Russian Deputy Economic
Development Minister Andrey Slepnyev signed agreement on establishing
reciprocal trade representations between the executive bodies of the
two states.

Head of the Migration agency Gagik Yeganyan and deputy director of the
Russian federal migration service Nikolay Smorodin signed declaration
on implementation of the agreement on readmission.

Deputy defense minister Ara Nazaryan and first deputy of the Russian
federal service Alexander Fomin signed a memorandum on mutual
understanding on creation of joint military-technical ventures.

Heads of the two states Serzh Sargsyan and Dmitry Medvedev highly
praised the current level of bilateral relations, pointing out the
strategic and allied nature of the relations. The first state visit of
the Russian president was considered a serious impetus for registering
new quality of relations.

Armenian President: We are forced to wait for Ankara to show real
commitment to meet its international obligations
2010-08-20 17:41:00


ArmInfo. There are no two neighbor nations who have no historical
contradictions and unresolved problems, President of Armenia Serzh
Sargsyan said during the opening of Hill of Honor Memorial Complex
today.

The ceremony was also attended by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

"The civilized response to this challenge is cooperation, mutually
beneficial trade, joint search for common grounds. We followed this
very logic when initiating the process to normalize Armenian-Turkish
relations. Today, this process has come to a standstill because of
lack of political will on Turkey's part and for the moment we are,
unfortunately, forced to wait for Ankara to show real commitment to
meet its international obligations," Sargsyan said.

ARMENIA'S NEXT ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS?
Diana Markosian
RIA Novosti
17:33 19/08/2010


The tiny mountainous nation may soon become a desert.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev arrived in Armenia Thursday evening
on a two-day visit. On his agenda: the Russian military base, ongoing
discussions about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and a visit to the
genocide memorial. But, what's not a priority is the environmental
crisis currently taking place in Armenia.

The tiny mountainous nation may soon become a desert, environmentalists
say.

Human logging in Armenia wipes out an estimated 750,000 cubic meters
of forest coverage each year. Today only 8 percent of the country is
forested. That's down from a peak of more than 40 percent, according
to the World Bank.

At the current rate of deforestation, environmentalists say
desertification will take place in the next 50 years.

To make matters worse, the changing global climate is threatening
the last fragments of the country's forests.

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) warns that "Armenia's
future economic development will depend on the decisions that the
current generation makes about investments in adaptation [to climate
change]." The group recently released its findings in a study conducted
by the Stockholm Environment Institute called the "Socio-Economic
Impact of Climate Change in Armenia."

"Armenia is focused on economic and social impacts when it comes
to development, but the third aspect of sustainable development is
environmental impacts and this is not being adequately addressed,"
said Jason Sohigian, deputy director of the Armenia Tree Project,
a non-governmental organization working to reforest Armenia.

"Business and economic development have been identified as a priority,"
he says. "That's obviously very important, but business and life itself
are supported by natural ecosystem services like forests, water,
soil, and clean air, which often can't be easily replaced when they
are degraded or depleted."

The Armenia Tree Project, based in the U.S. state of Massachusetts
is trying to revive Armenia's lost forests. In the last 16 years,
the small organization has planted more than 3.5 million trees around
the country. But with the current rate of deforestation, the group's
efforts may not be enough to solve the country's problem.

"One or two organizations with small budgets cannot reforest Armenia,"
said Areg Maghkian, associate director of the Armenian Tree Project.

"The government must realize that this is an issue of national
security. If we as a country are serious about reforestation, then
the initiative must be taken by the government."

The tiny country, nestled in the southern pocket of the Caucasus,
lost many trees during the energy crisis and economic blockade in the
1990s. Two decades later, experts say illegal logging and lucrative
lumber trading have done greater damage.

"The deforestation started spontaneously in the 1990s," said Hakob
Sanasaranyan chairman of the non-profit organization, Armenia's Union
of Greens. Sanasaranyan says the exploitation of forest resources
got worse when powerful statesmen monopolized resources and began to
profit from importing firewood to the Ararat Valley.

The demand for wood has created a multimillion-dollar lumber export
business. In the last five years, wood exports have seen a 10-fold
increase, most of which were shipped to places like Italy and
the United Arab Emirates, according to the Republic of Armenia's
Statistical Service.

Some environmentalists blame Armenia's Environment Ministry because
the forests are state-owned, and are supposed to be protected by
law; but several firms in the lumber business have managed to obtain
licenses from the ministry so that they could log legally.

"The problem is our leaders are more concerned about maintaining power
than helping the country," said Kharik Hovhannisyan, an environmental
expert in Armenia. "A lot of them are scared to speak out and to
honestly express their opinions, for fear of losing their position."

To date, the Minister of Nature Protection Aram Harutyunyan has yet
to respond to an emailed interview inquiry about the environmental
crisis taking place in his country.

"When we cut forests, we are contributing to climate change with our
own hands," said Hovhannisyan. "There is a natural climate change,
and one caused by humans. Armenians are propelling this."

"No water, no heat, no electricity"

Dwindling forest land has also threatened Armenia's water resources.

The country's forest cover is fundamental to the quality and quantity
of water resources, environmentalists say.

In the center of Yerevan, only a handful of homes have the luxury
of 24-hour running water. Each month, a French-run company managing
Yerevan's water distribution sends charts to all households, detailing
the times that running water will be available. For most people,
this is actually an improvement on the previous system.

"Now they don't have to guess when they will have water," said Abgar
Yeghoyan, chairman of Consumer Rights Protection in Yerevan. "The
amount of water you have during the day really depends on where you
live and what floor your apartment is on. Some people have two hours,
some people have eight."

But environmentalists say Armenia is not short on fresh water supply;
on the contrary, it has more than 80 medium-to-large water reservoirs.

They say the problem is how to distribute water resources and maintain
infrastructure.

"We have enough water, enough resources in this country, but it is
not being managed well," said Maghakian of the Armenian Tree Project.

"There's so much potential for this country, if we are really thinking
of the future."

With climate change a reality, environmentalists are painting a bleak
future for Armenia.

The First National Report to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change warned that a two-degree Celsius increase in Armenia
over the 21st century will decrease the total annual flow of water
by 15 to 20 percent.

"This would devastate Armenia," said Soghian of the Armenian Tree
Project, adding that even major water sources like Lake Sevan can't
provide water forever.

"You can't bring back the beauty that once existed in Armenia,"
said Hovhannisyan. "Even if you spend millions of dollars, you can't
achieve what was once was here," he says. "If you lose water, you
lose life in this world."

Relations with Turkey Articles

PRESIDENT GUL ADMITS STATE'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR DINK
MURDER
BIAnet.org
Aug 17 2010
Turkey

President Abdullah Gul accepted the state's responsibility for the
murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink. Gul said that Dink
died because "necessary precautions" had not been taken prior to
the murder.

Burcin BELGE burcin@bianet.org Ankara - BİA News Center17 August 2010,
Tuesday In an announcement made prior to a state visit to Azerbaijan
on Monday (16 August), President Abdullah Gul said that "necessary
precautions" to prevent the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist
Hrant Dink had not been taken. Gul admitted the responsibility of
the state for the killing of the journalist.

Gul is currently paying an official visit to Baku, the capital of
Azerbaijan. In a press conference at Ataturk Airport in Istanbul held
prior to his departure, Gul stated, "Unfortunately, Hrant Dink died
because the necessary precautions had not been taken".

With Gul's statement, the state's responsibility for the murder of
the then editor-in-chief of the Armenian Agos newspaper was admitted
on the highest level.

Foreign Minister claimed Dink to have "insulted Turkishness" When Dink
had been sentenced to prison on the grounds of his writings, he had
applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). One week later,
on 19 January 2007, he was assassinated. While the case at the ECHR
was still pending, the Dink family opened another trial and raised the
question why the murder had not been prevented. In the defence of the
Turkish government before the ECHR the government had just recently
claimed, "Dink insulted Turkishness, he wrote a hate speech. This kind
of writing incites the public to hatred and creates a public offence".

Pointing to the fact that the person who threatened employees of
the Agos newspaper had been penalized, the government said, ""If it
is agreed that the protection of freedom of thought is a positive
responsibility of the state, then the ideas expressed on a disputable
matter as in the letters sent by this person should also be agreed
on as discussable and these thoughts must be protected as well. It
is however impossible to protect thoughts of hatred".

The Minister of Foreign Affairs said that this defence was a technical
statement based on previous defences. (BB)

[what does this last sentence mean?]
ARMENIAN AMERICAN CLAIMS FOR TURKISH COMPENSATION
'LEGALLY INVALID'
news.az
Aug 17 2010
Azerbaijan


Compensation claims from Armenians in the USA for Ottoman-era property
in Turkey are "legally invalid", according to a Turkish historian.

The issue was closed with the payment of $900,000 by Turkey following
an agreement signed by Turkey and the United States in 1934, the head
of Armenian studies at the Turkish Historical Society, Prof Dr Kemal
Cicek, said.

On claims that buildings such as the Cankaya Palace and Erzurum
Congress Building were Armenian properties, Cicek said, "Documents
on the history of the buildings are in the archives of Cankaya Palace.

The issue is over for us."

He said that suits for compensation filed by two Armenians living in
the United States did not stand up.

"These suits are legally invalid, because according to my research,
commissions were established in the United States and Turkey on
Armenian compensation demands during the period between the Treaty of
Lausanne (1923) and 1937. The commissions put an end to these demands
under the international agreement."

Dink Family Demands Eradication of Controversial Turkish Article 301
asbarez
Thursday, August 19th, 2010


ISTANBUL (Huriyet) - The infamous Article 301 will disrupt any sort of
settlement between the Turkish state and the family of murdered
journalist Hrant Dink, according to his brother, Khosrov Dink.

Article 301, which took effect on June of 2005, is a controversial
article of the Turkish Penal Code which makes it illegal to insult
Turkey, the Turkish ethnicity, or any Turkish governmental
institution.

The proposal comes after Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
expressed regret over the defense that the Turkish state used at the
European Court of Human Rights in which it drew parallels between
Dink's perspectives and Neo-Nazism.
Davutoglu said the defense could not be withdrawn but added that the
state could settle with the victim's family. `The statements of the
foreign minister are important,' said Hosrof Dink.

However, he also said that there could be no deal with the state as
long as Article 301 continues to exist, adding that the article's
abolishment was a `struggle of honor' since his brother was condemned
because of it.

`Hrant wanted to go to the European court to show the injustice of the
sentence he received and to explain that he was not an `enemy of
Turkey. It was the last thing he did before he was murdered.'

Khosrov Dink said that as long as Article 301 could be used to
sentence people, it would be as though his brother is still lying on
the sidewalk that he was shot on.

After Hrant Dink was murdered by an ultranationalist in January 2007;
his body lay on the sidewalk of a busy Istanbul street in what became
a famous image.

The journalist's brother recalled Turkish President Abdullah Gul's
comment that the state had its share of neglect in the assassination,
saying, `We expect the president to mobilize the State Control Board
[DDK] which operates under him.'

Davutoglu spoke on the matter in Kahramanmaras on Wednesday, saying:
`I feel regret for sending a defense to the European Court regarding
the freedom of expression.A defense like this could not have come to
mind. As an intellectual and a minister, I could not come to terms
with this.'

The minister claimed he was against the state confronting citizens in
the matter of freedom of speech at the European court and that he has
ordered his civil servants to not present such cases for his approval.
WEIGHT OF HISTORY: UPHOLDING GENOCIDE STUDY GUIDE
Worcester Telegram
Aug 17 2010
MA


A federal appeals court has ruled that Massachusetts education
officials were within their rights to issue curriculum guidelines
that excluded specific references to materials suggesting the Armenian
genocide did not happen.

The ruling is being hailed by some as a major defeat for those who
would revise history to exonerate the Ottoman Turkish government of
its role in the mass killings of Armenians in the early 20th century;
it is being lamented by others who, whatever their view of that
history may be, believe it marks a loss for First Amendment rights
of free expression.

We believe the ruling was correct, and that neither reaction captures
the subtleties of what the appeals court was saying.

The case began in 1999 when David Driscoll, then state Commissioner of
Education, circulated draft history curriculum guidelines addressing
the study of genocide. After complaints from Turkish groups, officials
added websites and references questioning the Armenian genocide;
following further objections from Armenian groups, most of those
references were dropped before the guidelines were finally issued.

A district court upheld the state~Rs action. Turkish cultural groups
appealed, arguing that their First Amendment rights to ~Sinquire,
teach and learn free from viewpoint discrimination~T had been violated.

The appeals court has now upheld the lower court, finding that states
have considerable discretion in issuing curriculum guidelines, and
noting ~S~E the government~Rs authority to choose viewpoints when
the government itself is speaking.~T

But the critical point to understand is that the court found that
this case simply does not implicate First Amendment rights.

~S~Ethe terms of the Guide,~T the court wrote, ~Sallow teachers to
look beyond it, and its directions to sources with a particular point
of view are not meant to declare other positions out of bounds in
study or discussion ~E~T

The weight of historical fact weighs heavily against the view that
the Ottoman government did not perpetrate a genocide. We believe that
view remains a serious barrier to reconciliation between Turkish and
Armenian populations everywhere.

But this federal court ruling makes clear that Turkish cultural groups
and others remain free to advance their arguments that what happened
to the Armenian people was not a genocide.

Mr. Driscoll~Rs initial wavering on this issue was regrettable,
even if understandable given the intense pressures that attend
this topic. His ultimate decision, however, was sound. The state
guidelines will point students and teachers to solid sources, from
which they will surely learn that this is very contentious history,
indeed. Yet most teachers and students, when viewing the sources with
an open mind, will come to agree with the standard and, we believe,
incontrovertible view that the Armenian genocide is a historical fact.

Relations with Turkey Articles

PRESIDENT GUL ADMITS STATE'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR DINK
MURDER
BIAnet.org
Aug 17 2010
Turkey

President Abdullah Gul accepted the state's responsibility for the
murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink. Gul said that Dink
died because "necessary precautions" had not been taken prior to
the murder.

Burcin BELGE burcin@bianet.org Ankara - BİA News Center17 August 2010,
Tuesday In an announcement made prior to a state visit to Azerbaijan
on Monday (16 August), President Abdullah Gul said that "necessary
precautions" to prevent the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist
Hrant Dink had not been taken. Gul admitted the responsibility of
the state for the killing of the journalist.

Gul is currently paying an official visit to Baku, the capital of
Azerbaijan. In a press conference at Ataturk Airport in Istanbul held
prior to his departure, Gul stated, "Unfortunately, Hrant Dink died
because the necessary precautions had not been taken".

With Gul's statement, the state's responsibility for the murder of
the then editor-in-chief of the Armenian Agos newspaper was admitted
on the highest level.

Foreign Minister claimed Dink to have "insulted Turkishness" When Dink
had been sentenced to prison on the grounds of his writings, he had
applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). One week later,
on 19 January 2007, he was assassinated. While the case at the ECHR
was still pending, the Dink family opened another trial and raised the
question why the murder had not been prevented. In the defence of the
Turkish government before the ECHR the government had just recently
claimed, "Dink insulted Turkishness, he wrote a hate speech. This kind
of writing incites the public to hatred and creates a public offence".

Pointing to the fact that the person who threatened employees of
the Agos newspaper had been penalized, the government said, ""If it
is agreed that the protection of freedom of thought is a positive
responsibility of the state, then the ideas expressed on a disputable
matter as in the letters sent by this person should also be agreed
on as discussable and these thoughts must be protected as well. It
is however impossible to protect thoughts of hatred".

The Minister of Foreign Affairs said that this defence was a technical
statement based on previous defences. (BB)

[what does this last sentence mean?]
ARMENIAN AMERICAN CLAIMS FOR TURKISH COMPENSATION
'LEGALLY INVALID'
news.az
Aug 17 2010
Azerbaijan


Compensation claims from Armenians in the USA for Ottoman-era property
in Turkey are "legally invalid", according to a Turkish historian.

The issue was closed with the payment of $900,000 by Turkey following
an agreement signed by Turkey and the United States in 1934, the head
of Armenian studies at the Turkish Historical Society, Prof Dr Kemal
Cicek, said.

On claims that buildings such as the Cankaya Palace and Erzurum
Congress Building were Armenian properties, Cicek said, "Documents
on the history of the buildings are in the archives of Cankaya Palace.

The issue is over for us."

He said that suits for compensation filed by two Armenians living in
the United States did not stand up.

"These suits are legally invalid, because according to my research,
commissions were established in the United States and Turkey on
Armenian compensation demands during the period between the Treaty of
Lausanne (1923) and 1937. The commissions put an end to these demands
under the international agreement."

Dink Family Demands Eradication of Controversial Turkish Article 301
asbarez
Thursday, August 19th, 2010


ISTANBUL (Huriyet) - The infamous Article 301 will disrupt any sort of
settlement between the Turkish state and the family of murdered
journalist Hrant Dink, according to his brother, Khosrov Dink.

Article 301, which took effect on June of 2005, is a controversial
article of the Turkish Penal Code which makes it illegal to insult
Turkey, the Turkish ethnicity, or any Turkish governmental
institution.

The proposal comes after Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
expressed regret over the defense that the Turkish state used at the
European Court of Human Rights in which it drew parallels between
Dink's perspectives and Neo-Nazism.
Davutoglu said the defense could not be withdrawn but added that the
state could settle with the victim's family. `The statements of the
foreign minister are important,' said Hosrof Dink.

However, he also said that there could be no deal with the state as
long as Article 301 continues to exist, adding that the article's
abolishment was a `struggle of honor' since his brother was condemned
because of it.

`Hrant wanted to go to the European court to show the injustice of the
sentence he received and to explain that he was not an `enemy of
Turkey. It was the last thing he did before he was murdered.'

Khosrov Dink said that as long as Article 301 could be used to
sentence people, it would be as though his brother is still lying on
the sidewalk that he was shot on.

After Hrant Dink was murdered by an ultranationalist in January 2007;
his body lay on the sidewalk of a busy Istanbul street in what became
a famous image.

The journalist's brother recalled Turkish President Abdullah Gul's
comment that the state had its share of neglect in the assassination,
saying, `We expect the president to mobilize the State Control Board
[DDK] which operates under him.'

Davutoglu spoke on the matter in Kahramanmaras on Wednesday, saying:
`I feel regret for sending a defense to the European Court regarding
the freedom of expression.A defense like this could not have come to
mind. As an intellectual and a minister, I could not come to terms
with this.'

The minister claimed he was against the state confronting citizens in
the matter of freedom of speech at the European court and that he has
ordered his civil servants to not present such cases for his approval.
WEIGHT OF HISTORY: UPHOLDING GENOCIDE STUDY GUIDE
Worcester Telegram
Aug 17 2010
MA


A federal appeals court has ruled that Massachusetts education
officials were within their rights to issue curriculum guidelines
that excluded specific references to materials suggesting the Armenian
genocide did not happen.

The ruling is being hailed by some as a major defeat for those who
would revise history to exonerate the Ottoman Turkish government of
its role in the mass killings of Armenians in the early 20th century;
it is being lamented by others who, whatever their view of that
history may be, believe it marks a loss for First Amendment rights
of free expression.

We believe the ruling was correct, and that neither reaction captures
the subtleties of what the appeals court was saying.

The case began in 1999 when David Driscoll, then state Commissioner of
Education, circulated draft history curriculum guidelines addressing
the study of genocide. After complaints from Turkish groups, officials
added websites and references questioning the Armenian genocide;
following further objections from Armenian groups, most of those
references were dropped before the guidelines were finally issued.

A district court upheld the state~Rs action. Turkish cultural groups
appealed, arguing that their First Amendment rights to ~Sinquire,
teach and learn free from viewpoint discrimination~T had been violated.

The appeals court has now upheld the lower court, finding that states
have considerable discretion in issuing curriculum guidelines, and
noting ~S~E the government~Rs authority to choose viewpoints when
the government itself is speaking.~T

But the critical point to understand is that the court found that
this case simply does not implicate First Amendment rights.

~S~Ethe terms of the Guide,~T the court wrote, ~Sallow teachers to
look beyond it, and its directions to sources with a particular point
of view are not meant to declare other positions out of bounds in
study or discussion ~E~T

The weight of historical fact weighs heavily against the view that
the Ottoman government did not perpetrate a genocide. We believe that
view remains a serious barrier to reconciliation between Turkish and
Armenian populations everywhere.

But this federal court ruling makes clear that Turkish cultural groups
and others remain free to advance their arguments that what happened
to the Armenian people was not a genocide.

Mr. Driscoll~Rs initial wavering on this issue was regrettable,
even if understandable given the intense pressures that attend
this topic. His ultimate decision, however, was sound. The state
guidelines will point students and teachers to solid sources, from
which they will surely learn that this is very contentious history,
indeed. Yet most teachers and students, when viewing the sources with
an open mind, will come to agree with the standard and, we believe,
incontrovertible view that the Armenian genocide is a historical fact.