The WikiLeaks files - Armenia: High profile crime and Ukrainian ambassador's allegation

Most of the criminal incidents of October 2008 reflected in the US embassy cable below have been widely reported and nothing new. The most surprising and unknown to me was the allegation by the Ukrainian ambassador that his apartment in Yerevan was broken into for “politically-motivated” reasons related to his staging of Ukraine famine remembrance event the same day that Russian president Medvedev arrived for his first state visit in Armenia. However, even the US ambassador Yovanovitch specifically mentions about US embassy’s “doubt” re Ukrainian ambassador’s “assumption”.

Below are selected extracts. US embassy cables in full.

SUMMARY
A recent string of unconnected violent attacks around Armenia has prompted the opposition to decry the emergence of a "criminal state." Over the October 24-26 weekend, one person was killed in Yerevan, four were killed in the northern city of Spitak, and the recently re-elected mayor of the northern town of Stepanavan was almost knifed to death by his opponent's supporters. About a dozen other people were injured in these attacks, some critically. The motives of each attack remain unclear, with various media speculating on the causes while police launch investigations. In separate, recent attacks in Yerevan, a foreign businessman and the Ukrainian Ambassador were targeted by unknown assailants, apparently as a result of their business and diplomatic engagements.

YEREVAN'S VENDETTA MURDER AND DISCOTHEQUE VIOLENCE. President Sargsyan's nephew implicated
On October 26 in broad daylight in one of Yerevan's central neighborhoods, two young men shot and killed one man, while wounding his companion. After the voluntary surrender of one of the perpetrators, Armenia's Prosecutor General described the attack as a revenge murder for the November 2007 killing of the perpetrator's uncle, who was the chairman of the Armenian Association of Hunters and a senior member of the pro-government Prosperous Armenia party. The perpetrator of that crime was never prosecuted, but media reports alleged that law enforcement authorities suspected the victim of the October 26 attack could have been its perpetrator.

Also over the same weekend, violence broke out in two separate Yerevan discotheques, where a shootout in one of them reportedly left one person wounded. In another night spot, a mass brawl broke out, allegedly prompted by a nephew to President Sargsian. Press reports allege that Sargsian's nephew and companions initiated the brawl that reportedly resulted in serious injuries and the loss of an eye by one of the persons involved in the melee.

UKRAINIAN AMBASSADOR'S APARTMENT RANSACKED
Ukraine's Ambassador to Armenia recently shared with the Ambassador that his apartment was broken into on Sunday, October 19. He believed the crime was related to his defying the GOAM's heavy-handed attempts to persuade him to cancel the Holodomyr remembrance event (the 1932 famine that Ukrainians believe was genocide) which he held on Monday, October 20 -- the same day that Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev arrived for his first state visit to Armenia. On the preceding Saturday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had called in the Ukrainian Ambassador where he was told in no uncertain terms that the event had to be cancelled. He refused. On October 19, while he was out, his apartment was broken into, and his personal possessions smashed, and very little was stolen. It took the police over an hour and a half to respond. He told the Ambassador that he believed the crime was an effort to intimidate him before the remembrance event. No GOAM official attended the event and Armenia's Public Television (Channel H1) described the memorial event in its evening coverage as "terrible" and "only fit for a circus."

COMMENT
Armenia and the city of Yerevan have traditionally been quite safe cities for average citizens and for visiting foreigners. Lawlessness is nothing new in Armenia, particularly in the political, financial and criminal arenas. In recent times, officials from the tax and customs services have been assassinated for unclear reasons. There have also been too-frequent incidents of powerful persons -- oligarchs, generals, and their children, relatives, or bodyguards -- getting involved in sometimes violent confrontations with those who may cross their paths, whether on the highway or in a night club setting, typically with impunity. Such people have been shown most often to be above the law, in their confrontations with average passersby.

The various incidents grouped together in this cable have in common their recent timing and the fact they were incidents of violence, but in other respects differ. Purposefully targeted attacks of a foreign businessman or a possibly-targeted home invasion of a foreign diplomat (if that is truly what these events were) seem an entirely new factor in Armenia. The Hans Boon [Unzipped: the Dutch director of HayPost] attacks seem particularly suspicious. Given that foreigners are very rarely assaulted in Armenia, for the same man to be attacked twice in four months suggests either strikingly bad security judgment on his part or deliberate targeting. We have more doubt about the Ukrainian Ambassador,s assumption that the burglary of his home was politically-motivated. Economically-motivated burglaries are not too uncommon for expatriates, homes that may be less well-protected than are U.S. Embassy housing, while a government-sponsored raid on an ambassador,s home is far outside the bounds of what we have seen in Armenia before. We plan to look further into these issues in the upcoming weeks, and hope to refine our understanding of whether there is a new pattern of increased lawlessness and politically-motivated violence, or whether this was simply a particularly striking confluence of unrelated events.

[Yovanovitch]

Armenia - Turkey protocols: ‘happy ending’... for now

I will be very brief this time. Almost like a Hollywood movie, with a ‘happy ending’, of course. For now. Look, my take is that this decision makes everyone ‘happy’. All sides. Even International Crisis Group.

Wait for a sequel to come.

Britain’s cynical foreign policy and media re the Armenian Genocide denial

Britain’s foreign policy has always been cynical. No doubts that the same approach has been applied to the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. I recommend reading this article by the Guardian. However, I am disgusted that the Guardian journalist opened his post by saying “the so-called Armenian massacre of 1915”. This proves that not only the British foreign policy is cynical, but also the media does not go far away from the same approach, save the Independent, I guess.

Britain was accused of "genocide denial" today after the disclosure of Foreign Office documents revealing the government's refusal to recognise the so-called Armenian massacre of 1915, in which up to a million people died.

The documents, dating back over the last 15 years, say Anglo-Turkish relations are too important to be jeopardised by the issue because "Turkey is neuralgic and defensive about the charge of genocide".

One Foreign Office briefing for ministers conceded that the British government "is open to criticism in terms of the ethical dimension", but goes on to say: "The current line is the only feasible option" owing to "the importance of our relations (political, strategic and commercial) with Turkey". The 1999 briefing said: "Recognising the genocide would provide no practical benefit to the UK."

Britain's stance, stretching back over Labour and Tory administrations, was called a cynical "genocide denial" by Geoffrey Robertson, the QC who served as first president of the UN war crimes court for Sierra Leone. Robertson was commissioned by Armenian expatriate groups in London to review the foreign office files, obtained in heavily redacted form from freedom of information requests. He published a report today which says: "Parliament has been routinely misinformed by ministers who have recited FCO briefs without questioning their accuracy." [...]

Armenia - Turkey protocols: Moving forward, not forgetting the past

If there is one big policy issue which I actually agree with and support current Armenian authorities, its their policy towards rapprochement with Turkey.

I disagree that protests in Diaspora were harmful for current Armenian president Serj Sargsyan. Internally, may be (he does not have much support and trust inside the country, anyway). But internationally - not. Quite the contrary. He does not have a reputation on international scene, and these actions - going through difficult and sensitives agreement with Turkey despite Diaspora and some internal protests - will put him on the map to the level which he could never had dreamt of.

Here current Armenian president displayed leadership qualities. (I would never thought I'd ever say this re Serj Sargsyan but here we go) There are times when head of states need to conduct unpopular policies which may not be supported from a populist point of view but important for country’s future. It’s exactly that moment now in Armenia.

Where were Diaspora organisations when 1 March 08 happened in Armenia? Where were their voices when Armenians in Armenia were left alone in face of widespread human rights abuses and election fraud? The answer is simple. They were dead silent. Now when I hear “democracy” or “human rights” or anti-Serj shout or posters during the protests in Diaspora, I simply can’t take them seriously. Well, with one important reservation. If only this whole anti-protocol hysteria would help for Diaspora groups and individuals to understand that what we need first and foremost is democratic Armenia where human rights are respected, if only they understand that this is the main direction where their efforts should be directed at, then I would happily take back my skepticism. Until then, I am afraid, it’s too little too late.

My main reservation with the document, as I mentioned earlier too, is the so called ‘historical commission’. However, from a pure language point of view, there is no prefix “historical” in the protocols, and there is absolutely no mention of the Genocide there, although, yes, it is implied. However, we should not be afraid of it: no ‘historical commission’ is able to put a question mark for the Armenian Genocide. It’s the fact for international and scientific community, regardless of the limited numbers of countries which officially recognised it. (which is a sole consequence of their geopolitical interests) What is more important is the recognition of the Genocide by Turkey. I do believe that opening up the dialogue on the issue, which will be inevitable following the ratification of the protocols (and partly happened already thanks to international pressure and efforts by few Turkish intellectuals), would contribute to it. Protocols are not about forgetting or denying the Armenian Genocide. Protocols are about moving forward without forgetting the past.

Now the ball is on the Turkish side. The general consensus in Yerevan is that Armenia will formally ratify the protocols only after Turkey first ratify them. Taking into account the circumstances, I do support such approach.

P.S. below are just few of my recent tweets on the topic.
For my full twitter feed, see http://twitter.com/unzippedblog

Reports: Live broadcast of #Armenia - #Turkey protocols signing ceremony from #Zurich on Armenian public TV from 8pm local time #Yerevan

#Armenia president Serj Sargsyan statement re signing of protocols with #Turkey (AM) http://bit.ly/fBaQl 

All eyes on #Zurich today. What's more important, however, #Armenia & #Turkey parliaments afterwards. They have to ratify the protocols.

Group of prominent #Diaspora Armenians issued an open letter in support of #Armenia president policy re #Turkey deal http://bit.ly/hddLI

Imitational rally by ARF Dashnaktsutyun & co against #Armenia - #Turkey protocols soon to start in #Yerevan. A show which decides nothing.

The Economist: #Armenia - #Turkey : Bones to pick http://bit.ly/Cd1L3 

Double standards: ARF allowed to protest at government buildings, others - not. http://bit.ly/f0V24 #Yerevan #Armenia

I respect Robert Frisk of The Independent, but disagree that #Armenia - #Turkey protocol means "Genocide forgotten". http://bit.ly/D5NjL

The very fact that this 'opposing forces' joined by the neo-nazi homophobe Aryans made me treat them as a joke http://bit.ly/1ZSsMz #Armenia

It sucks seeing Heritage & ARF Dashnaktsutyun signatures along with neo-nazi homophobe Aryans against #Armenia #Turkey deal http://bit.ly/Klipx

#Yerevan diaries: Dashnak's 'protest' re #Armenia - #Turkey protocols http://bit.ly/boQU1

Opinion: "Bloody Turk!" (by Orhan Kemal Cengiz)

Recommended reading.

***

Today's Zaman

 

I am not a religious person. I am not Kurdish. I am not gay. I am not Christian. I am not Armenian. I am not Roma. But I have spent all my life defending these people's rights.

 

I am a human rights defender. When I describe myself, I say I am a human rights defender, a lawyer and a writer. It was during my first time in London in 1998 that I realized, no matter what I do, I was a "bloody Turk" for some people. Ironically, I was working for the Kurdish Human Right Project there, and we were taking cases to the European Court of Human Rights, as a result of which I felt deeply threatened by the deep state elements in my country. When I met with the Armenian community in London, I turned into a representative of Turkey. It was the first time my "Turkishness" took precedence over all my qualifications. Massacres of Armenians were orchestrated and organized by the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) -- which came to power through a military coup -- while the Ottoman Empire was falling apart. After these massacres and as a result of the lack of confrontation with our past, the CUP and its gangs changed their format and turned into the "deep state" in Turkey. These deep state elements continued their massacres and manipulations and drenched Turkey with blood during the Republican era. We have these deep state elements, but we also have many people fighting against them with or without knowing the history. The Ergenekon trial, in this sense, is a turning point in this endeavor in Turkey. You can think of the Ergenekon gang as the armed wing of the CUP in today's Turkey. The massacres of Armenians were carried out by a certain mindset, by a political movement. Unfortunately, this political movement also created the official Turkish history, one in which there is no place for Armenians. And the state is in complete denial of what happened in Turkey in the past. This denial unfortunately gives strong support to a racist approach toward Turkey and its people. I was in Toronto last year attending an extremely interesting course on genocide. For two weeks we went into all the details of different genocides that took place in various parts of the world. All lecturers gave exemplary presentations, and I felt I had really learned something. However, I also realized that there was a fundamental difference in the way in which the Armenian genocide is being handled. When we spoke about the Holocaust, we spoke of the Nazi regime; when we discussed the genocide in Cambodia, we talked about the Khmer regime; when it came to the Armenian genocide, though, we only heard the word "Turks." Complete and blanket denial feeds complete and absolute labeling. This is a vicious circle. It is very unfortunate that some Armenians, while believing they are seeking justice, have turned into hopeless racists. They do not want to believe that there are many good people in this country. They do not want to remember that there were also Turks who lost their lives while trying to protect Armenians. They hold tightly on to this image of the "bloody Turk." Every Turk, every individual living in Turkey, is just a murderer for them. The pathology of amnesia and the pathology of blind hatred are two sides of one coin. They both serve the same purpose: Both leave Turks and Armenians as deeply neurotic people. In the midst of all this madness, Hrant Dink was a safe haven of reason, wisdom and compassion. He had a deep understanding of Turkey and the trauma we have been suffering for so long. He was killed because he was the hope in the face of this madness. He could have been killed by an Armenian racist. But instead, he was killed by Turkish racists, of course, under the guidance of the deep state. Dink was a bloody Turk for Armenian racists and an Armenian traitor for racist Turks. He was a dangerous figure for all who wanted to continue this vicious circle of hatred. During his funeral, we chanted, "We all are Hrant Dink." We all need to be Dink if we wish to contribute to reconciliation. I bow respectfully before his memory.

18 September 2009, Friday

Unzipped on France24 re Armenia - Turkey rapprochement

France24 did feature in past some posts from both of my blogs, but I was not aware of this one until today. (Thanks to Shant for the video!) It was made on 24 April 2009. They quoted from my post Obama, Turkey, and I. What I said back then has a particular relevance and urgency today too, in my opinion, considering new developments in Armenia-Turkey rapproachment.

Armenian side did whatever possible to do to pave the way for reconciliation despite Turkey’s official refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.

Armenia - Turkey: a breakthrough?

Intrigue of The Day

Here we are. Could be a sign of a breakthrough in Armenia-Turkey relations. All the main international and local news agencies now report re breaking news on protocols signed by foreign ministries of Armenia and Turkey on establishing diplomatic relations, opening the border, and general normalisation of relations between countries.

In 6 weeks, just in time for a football match (talking about 2nd round of ‘football diplomacy‘) between Turkey and Armenia, political consultations should end and the protocols sent to the parliaments for ratification.

I now read the original protocols in full. Of course, I anticipate that one of the main problems will be the so called 'historical sub-commission'. I personally do not mind joint commission to investigate archives as long as it does not aim to define whether the genocide happened or not. In the protocol, the language is very diplomatic without any clear specifications.

On the other hand, I am glad that there is no (officially stated and signed) connection of Armenia-Turkey with other conflicts' settlement, namely Karabakh. This is a positive sign. Of course, we do not know what is going on backstage, which could lead to other breaking news to come.

Group of Armenian bloggers fighting a scapegoat re Karabakh

A statement was published by a group of Armenian bloggers. They demand a resignation of Armenian Foreign Minister Nalbandyan following a disclosure of the main principles (nothing new really) of Karabakh settlement currently on table.

Do they actually think that it’s a Minister of Foreign Affairs who formulate and lead Armenian foreign policy? Of course, they do not. No need to re-state that Armenian foreign policy is being directed by a president. FM Nalbandyan is simply an employee who is conducting work based on instructions and approvals by his boss. It’s just plain easy and does not require courage to target consequences but not the roots. It’s much more convenient to find a scapegoat and fight him.

In order to formulate my opinion re Serj Sargsyan’s Karabakh policy, I need more details about how exactly this plan will be implemented. My approval or disapproval of the plan will depend on two fundamental principles which I believe should be fixed unambiguous in any Karabakh related peace deal:
- Security guarantees for Karabakh and Armenia;
- Karabakh independence

I will leave to our military and security experts to judge whether - under any peace deal - such guarantees are included and ensured. As to the status of Karabakh (independence), I can judge it myself. However, I will need details on how exactly the disclosed principles will be implemented to understand whether they may result in Karabakh independence or not. I have my big doubts about it.

I also disagree with the opposition Armenian National Congress statement and stance re Karabakh. While they were right stating at the beginning that to formulate a final opinion more details are needed, their subsequent outright rejection of it and talks of treachery etc are not productive. In fact, Serj Sargsyan’s policy regarding Karabakh (and Turkey) is effectively a continuation of Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s policy. Will the opposition pursue anything substantially different if they come to power? I do not think so.

‘I am a European’

I do consider myself a European, and my vision of Armenia is that of Europe.

I wish this Quote of the Day by Armenia president Serj Sargsyan is true:

“Armenia wants to live according to European laws.”

“Every Armenian considers him/her-self a European, regardless of whether the Europeans think so or not."

Армения хочет жить по европейским законам, заявил президент Армении Серж Саргсян участникам неформального сбора молодых политических деятелей Европы. “Мы хотим изменить правила нашей жизни, и жить по европейским канонам, но вместе с этим внести в эту общую гамму свой собственный оттенок ”, - сказал президент в ходе проходящего 1-3 мая в армянском курортном городе Цахкадзор сбора. Президент добавил, что Армения вошла в различные европейские структуры и добровольно взяла на себя обязательства, которые обязана выполнять. Саргсян также отметил, что любой «армянин чувствует себя европейцем, независимо от того, считают так европейцы или нет”.

Sargsyan will be in Prague on 7 May for the official launch of the Eastern Partnership – new EU initiative of closer ties with its Eastern neighbours, including Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus.

Joke of the Day: Dashnaktsutyun is... ‘opposition’

They’ve got to be kidding...

Nationalist ARF Dashnaktsutyun party bears its ultimate share of responsibility for whatever happened in Armenia since they became the ruling coalition member. Quitting the coalition – as was announced today, and rumoured few days ago - do not spare them of that responsibility. They had the opportunities to put forward their objections or policies. Even if (theoretically) they were unable to do so or got ignored, for whatever the reasons might have been, they preferred to remain in the coalition up until now, enjoying all the benefits it could provide them.

And what a convenient time Dashnaks chose to show off that they are the party of ‘principles’, to flesh up their muscles as a ‘national’ party with ’national’ ideas, and, of course, in ‘opposition’ to the ‘treacherous’ government. Just in time for Yerevan municipal election, and in preparation for the next presidential election.

Unfortunately, genuine anger and deserved widespread criticism in relation to timing and the secretive nature (as of today) of the so called Armenia – Turkey ‘roadmap deal’ is being exploited by some circles, and not only Dashnaks, to stir up their nationalist agenda. I cannot see how nationalism could be an answer to the challenges we face. It will never solve our problems, but rather will exacerbate them.

Dashnaks are so out of touch from contemporary realities. They are so last century.

Is Turkey bluffing re 'reaching deal' with Armenia?

What kind of 'roadmap' is this if reportedly opening the border is "out of the question"?

Is this Obama directed PR?.. again?.. to prevent using the G-word on 24 April?

Well, let's see what Armenia Foreign Ministry will have to say tomorrow...

Turkey says accord reached with Armenia on roadmap
ANKARA, Turkey (AP) - A foreign ministry statement says Turkey and Armenia have made solid progress toward reconciliation and reached agreement on a roadmap to normalize ties. The statement issued late Wednesday says the two countries have reached a framework agreement that satisfies both sides. A senior government official, however, said opening the Turkish-Armenian border, closed in 1993, is "out of the question." He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not allowed to speak to media.

Obama, Turkey, and I

I never thought that PR could be so overwhelming.

It was like a huge show, like a Hollywood movie, or some would say a rock concert.

I decided to make this post only after this wave went down a bit.

I felt that I am under attack by all those media reports which forced me to choose between the Genocide recognition and rapprochement with Turkey. I refuse to consider such choice. I do not think they are mutually exclusive.

I am neither encouraged nor discouraged by Obama’s words. It was OK speech. You could not have expected more at that moment, at that time.

I do not buy “it’s not a right time” argument. Due to its geographical location and regional geopolitics, Turkey will always be a country of strategic significance. If we follow “it’s not a right time” argument, there will never be a “right time”. Just because there are strategic interests, a country cannot be free of human rights abuses, current or past, and especially the most extreme level of it – Genocide. Sadly, and not only with regards to Turkey, putting ‘strategic importance’ before human rights is widespread. Call me naïve, but I did (and still do) support Obama hoping that human rights and (at least relatively) ethical politics will be brought back to the global politics. Obama’s first steps in presidency proved that he is the man for the job to make changes. Therefore, the only right thing to do for Obama is to follow his pre-election pledges and recognise the Armenian Genocide.

Let’s put it this way: I will be very disappointed if Obama won’t stick to his promises, and I will be very disappointed if recent positive signs in Armenia-Turkey rapprochement fail. I am not convinced that recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the US will have a long term negative consequences. US are as important to Turkey, as Turkey to the US. Although not on the same scale, but France’s recent example proves that countries move on for more practical purposes. On the other hand, having secured the US formal recognition will perhaps help many in Armenian Diaspora to recover from a ‘Genocide identity’ and start focusing on more pressing needs for Armenia, that is human rights, regional peace, economy etc. (vain hopes?) Well, I do not know how these all will develop, but Turkey could have done much more if serious in normalisation of relationships without bullying tactics, with opening the border in the immediate aftermath of Russia-Georgia war (this could have an important humanitarian explanation).

Human rights abuses and crimes against humanity can never be considered as an internal matter of countries. It’s in a large part due to the external pressures, and the ‘threat’ of US recognition, that Turkey’s official position shows signs of changes. Of course, changes boosted internally too… Hrant Dink, intellectuals… In any case, for me, the most important and positive signs are Turkey’s internal developments, where Armenian question is becoming a less of a taboo, and increasing number of voices question the official line. While external pressures could damage this trend, they could also help in understanding that to avoid external pressures and manipulations they have to clean up this issue internally.

I have to say, I am supportive of Armenian government’s general position in relation to rapprochement with Turkey. (I do not know all specifics to be more precise) Armenian side did whatever possible to do to pave the way for reconciliation despite Turkey’s official refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Armenian officials were more than clear that they are for rapprochement without any preconditions. This is the only right and acceptable thing to do. Tying the opening of the border and reconciliation with other issues, such as Karabakh, is not only contra-productive, but aims at sabotaging the whole process.

Puzzle of The Day

RFE/RL: EU officials were left scratching their heads on March 11 when Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka unexpectedly cancelled a key meeting with the bloc's external relations commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, in favor of a snap trip to Armenia. [...]

The Belarusian leader's decision to stand up Ferrero-Waldner is all the more puzzling as the EU is less than a week away from a summit at which it is expected to invite a group of six ex-Soviet neighbors -- including Belarus -- to join its Eastern Partnership program.

The Eastern Partnership plan is meant to offer funds, free trade, and visa-free travel to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, and Belarus.

The inclusion of Belarus in the partnership initiative is considered critical in Brussels, where it is viewed as a vital element in the bloc's drive to steer its neighbors away from Russia and closer to the EU. [...]

Diplomats in Brussels say that the need to include Belarus is being seen as relatively uncontroversial by a majority of member states. All agree that Minsk's isolation has not produced results. And without Belarus, the Eastern Partnership would lose much of its regional clout.

However, there have been signs in recent weeks that Minsk may be having second thoughts. [...]

Presidential website in Armenia says:

"By the invitation of the President of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan the President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko is arriving today to Armenia on a working visit. In the framework of the visit Serzh Sargsyan and Alexander Lukashenko will discuss issues pertaining to the deepening of the bilateral interstate relations, further expansion of trade and economic relations, cooperation in the framework of international organizations and structures, as well as the means to address challenges triggered by the global and financial crisis in their national economies.The President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko will also meet with the representatives of the business circles of Armenia."

*photo - president.am

Charles Aznavour: “I am a free man and cannot lose my freedom for an honorary post”

UPDATE (12 February 2009): No longer a "free man", 'changed his mind', accepted... (see comments section below)

Says Charles Aznavour: “I am a free man. I was proposed by the president of Armenia a position of the Ambassador to Geneva, and I was absolutely flattered. That day I went to bed happy, but when I woke up I realised that if accepted I would lose my freedom. If I did not like any decision of the Armenian government, I would feel bad. I cannot lose my freedom for an honorary post.”

Interview with El Pais (via RFE/RL)

Armenia – Turkey football match was the most watched TV programme in 2008

Armenia-Turkey football match was watched by 32.48% TV viewers in Armenia, according to the results of monitoring by Yerevan representatives of AGB Nielsen Media Research, reports Armenia Today.

Eurovision was watched by 30.99%, and the final of European football championship – by 21.61% of respondents.

The Peace and Sport Image of the Year Award: Turkey and Armenia

Peace and Sport Organization (Organisation pour la Paix et le Sport) - press release:

This distinction for the best image of fraternization through sport was awarded for a photograph of the historic handshake between the President of the Republic of Turkey Abdullah Gül and the President of Armenia, Serge Sarkissian, during the qualifying match for the Football World Cup between Turkey and Armenia. Thanks to football, this moment marked the end of nearly two decades of diplomatic silence.

H.S.H. Prince Albert II of Monaco presented the award jointly to Armen Grigorian, Armenian Minister of Youth and Sport, and to Mahmut Özgener, President of the Turkish Football Federation, who exchanged long greetings on stage, creating a moment of intense emotion amongst spectators.

Joel Bouzou and David Tomatis, CEO of Sportel, acclaimed the photograph as “a symbol of hope for two communities whose history has been marked by hostility and pain.”

In a letter sent to Peace and Sport, the Armenian President Mr Sarkissian proclaimed himself “deeply moved to hear the Grand Jury’s decision to attribute the Peace and Sport Image of the Year Award to his handshake with Turkish President Mr Gül.” He added that he was convinced that “Sport is one of the best ways to overcome differences between nations”.

*photo - via Public Radio of Armenia

Reports: Samantha Power is back on board of Obama’s foreign policy team

Few weeks ago I wrote about speculations on potential return of Samantha Power to Obama’s foreign policy team. Samantha Power is a Pulitzer Prize winning author and renowned anti-genocide and human rights activist. She is pretty influential and considered as “pro-Armenian”. In February 2008, Samantha Power has taped a “powerful 5-minute video reviewing presidential hopeful Barack Obama's support for Armenian issues, and encouraging Armenian Americans to vote for him in the upcoming primaries”, as reported by the Armenian National Committee of America.

The main impediment to her return was an incident during Obama’s pre-election campaign, when Samantha Power called Hillary Clinton a “monster”. She then resigned from Obama’s presidential campaign team.

However, according to the reports coming out from the US, Samantha Power is back on board of Obama’s foreign policy team. The Huffington Post reports:

“WASHINGTON — An adviser to Barack Obama's presidential campaign who was forced to resign earlier this year after calling Sen. Hillary Rodham Cllinton a "monster" is now working on the transition team for the agency Clinton is expected to lead.

State Department officials said Friday that Samantha Power is among a group of foreign policy experts that the president-elect's office selected to help the incoming administration prepare for Clinton's anticipated nomination as secretary of state. The Obama transition team's Web site includes Power's name as one of 14 members of the "Agency Review Team" for the State Department.

Clinton's role at State is expected to be announced after the Thanksgiving weekend. Power's apparent rehabilitation is another sign of that impending move.

Clinton's office declined to comment on Power's inclusion in the State Department transition, but an official close to the Obama transition team said Power had "made a gesture to bury the hatchet" with Clinton and that it had been well-received.

Power has been given an official State Department e-mail address and has been seen in the building, said the State officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the transition. A State Department spokesman referred questions to Obama's transition team, which later declined to comment.”

*photo - via Mail Online

Armenian opposition’s “specialised committees”

This very brief news report on meeting held by the opposition Armenian National Congress is lacking details but informative nevertheless. It was decided by the opposition to form “specialised committees” on various aspects of life for the country – foreign policy, economy, legal system etc. They would aim to develop and present to the Congress policies and expert opinions for their relevant fields and on current issues.

I’ve been long in favour of a ‘shadow cabinet’ system (similar to the one operated in the UK by opposition parties) or something along the same line by its essence. It’s been a while that opposition hinted on the idea, and with this announcement on forming “specialised committees” it seems to me they are moving towards that direction, and aim to use the declared hiatus for organisational reforms and developments.

I’d like to see clear policy alternatives for all the important fields of life in Armenia, be that internal or external. I’d like to see people/teams responsible for those fields. These will be the policies and people who – in case of opposition coming to the power – will replace existing policies and people. This will help establishing new culture of transparency of political parties, minimise populism, and contribute to informed decisions made by the electorate, things which are lacking in current Armenia. Assuming, of course, that the policy recommendations (and specialised team members) will not remain ‘for internal consumption only’ but rather result in publicised policy formulations. Providing, of course, that the electorate will be able to exercise its election right which is lacking in current Armenia.

Will Samantha Power return as foreign policy advisor to Obama?

Some Jewish sources speculate on Obama’s foreign policy team saying that it will be “centrist” and “pragmatic”, the real meaning of which will be known after the president-elect takes the office in January.

Among potential candidates for Obama’s foreign policy team is Samantha Power (i.e. her return after the resignation during the pre-election campaign when she called Hillary Clinton a “monster”).

Samantha Power is a Pulitzer Prize winning author and renowned anti-genocide and human rights activist. In 2004, Power was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 top scientists and thinkers of that year. She is pretty influential and considered as “pro-Armenian”. Turkey will certainly prefer to see her out of the team. In February 2008, Samantha Power has taped a “powerful 5-minute video reviewing presidential hopeful Barack Obama's support for Armenian issues, and encouraging Armenian Americans to vote for him in the upcoming primaries”, reported the Armenian National Committee of America.

According to British sources, the Irish-born professor “was a key member of Obama's foreign policy team and one of his closest aides.” “If Obama makes it to the White House, Miss Power - who was cited by Men's Vogue as one of the most beautiful women in the world - was expected to take a crucial role in redefining the Anglo-American relationship.”

*photo - via Mail Online

Did Obama’s victory in the US elections make opening borders with Armenia a priority for Turkey?

Following recent statements on expected “extraordinary decisions”, “new climate” and “new developments” between Turkey and Armenia, some Turkish reports suggest that Obama’s victory in the US presidential election made opening borders with Armenia a mater of priority and strategic importance.

Today’s Zaman reports:

Democrat Barack Obama's landslide victory in the US election is a dream come true for most ordinary Turks, but it could mean more pressure on the government to speed up reforms for a better state of human rights in the country.

It is also likely to spell a definite end for the long-held Turkish policy of dealing with Armenian claims of genocide through counter-measures to suppress pro-genocide resolutions in Congress. [...]

Turkey has managed for decades to block Armenian efforts to win US recognition for genocide claims, but with the White House readying for an Obama era, it is high time for Ankara to promote a more comprehensive policy that goes far beyond addressing immediate challenges at the US Congress, experts say. Many fear that Obama’s use of the G-word in his next message for April 24 -- a traditional occasion when US presidents commemorate Armenians who perished in Anatolia in the last century -- could shatter Turkey-US ties and that following up on a recent drive for dialogue with Armenia might be the only way to save relations from a catastrophe.

“There is nothing to be afraid of; Turkey should trust itself. What needs to be done is further improving the relations with Yerevan and marginalizing the Armenian diaspora in the United States,” said Ömer Taşpınar, an expert on Turkey with the Washington-based Brookings Institution and a Today’s Zaman columnist. “By opening borders with Armenia and taking other appropriate steps, Turkey will have the trump card in its hands.”

President Abdullah Gül paid a landmark visit to Armenia in September, and officials of the two countries, which currently have no formal ties, have been having talks since then on normalizing relations.

Marc Grossman, a former US ambassador to Turkey, advised the Turkish government to keep improving ties with Armenia during a teleconference at the US Embassy in Ankara early on Wednesday. Dialogue and open borders with Armenia will give Turkey an advantage in discussing the issue with the Obama administration, he said.