65 replies to this topic

[kakachik77]

Yesterday I tried to search for Sach's email address at NYT but could not locate. I think we should try to send letters, her objective journalistic integrity is completely lacking.

[kakachik77]

from today's Groong, excellent commentary, we should try from the Diaspora to stop this kind of negativities going on.

STEREOTYPES ABOUT ARMENIA

Armenian News Network / Groong
January 11, 2005

By Haroutiun Khachatrian



During the last five months, at least four articles appeared in
leading Western newspapers about Armenia. As if agreed initially, all
four are about the emigration problem. The general scheme of all
articles is as follows: (see, for example the latest article of this
"series" entitled "For Young Armenians, a Promised Land Without
Promise" in the December 9 issue of The New York Times). People are
quoted as saying that in Armenia jobs are difficult to find, or they
are paid less than similar jobs abroad. Statements of the opposite
type are also included, e.g. young people are quoted as saying that
they will try to find jobs in their homeland, etc. However, the
general tone remains negative, the titles are as sad as this one
(giving a respective signal to the readers, most of whom do not read
more of an article than its title). And, what is more important, the
data of statistics showing the migration of Armenian workforce is no
more a problem like it was in the 90s, that emigration and immigration
have already balanced, are generally ignored.

Some observers in Armenia express the opinion that there is a sort
of "conspiracy" or "political order" aimed to display reality in
Armenia worse than it is (even Haykakan Zhamanak, an opposition-minded
daily, has used these terms). I believe that, in fact, some
long-established stereotypes are to be blamed, according to which
Armenia cannot be described in a way other than a week and dependent
country. As shown below, even the works of serious political analysts
are not free of these stereotypes. I take two recent materials that
appeared on the www.eurasianet.org internet edition as typical
examples of such an attitude, although many others of this type can be
shown. They are: "Armenia: the Dream of Complementarity and the
Reality of Dependency" by Michael Weinstein, and the report of the
International Crisis Group entitled "Armenia: Internal Instability
Ahead.".


STEREOTYPE ONE. ARMENIA TOTALLY DEPENDS ON RUSSIA

Weinstein writes: "Armenia's primary dependence on Russia is
difficult to deny. Militarily, Russia has 2,500 troops in the
country... Russia is also Armenia's major trading partner, its largest
source of investment, the main destination of its surplus labor, the
provider of its energy needs and military equipment and its biggest
creditor..."

There are several errors in these fragments (I'll show some of
them below), but even their absence would not change the main
question: even if all of this were correct, would it mean a
pessimistic conclusion for Armenia? Yes, Russia has been the largest
source of investments in Armenia in the last two years (replacing
Greece), but does it mean increasing Armenia's dependency upon Russia?
Quite the opposite. Nor is the presence of the Russian troops in
Armenia a sign of unilateral dependency, as Russia is no less
interested in having these troops in its main partner country in the
Caucasus. True, Armenia depends heavily on fuel supply from
Russia. But Germany does as well. To a lesser extent, but Germany is a
richer country.

Moreover, many analysts, including Weinstein, fail to see that
this dependency will most likely decrease. He writes: "In May, 2004,
Kocharian visited Moscow for talks about Russia's displeasure with
Yerevan's initiatives. Moscow wants [Yerevan's] assurance that the
Iranian pipeline will not be extended through Georgia and under the
Black Sea to Ukraine, bypassing Russia and depriving it of a market
for gas." Hence, the author sees this meeting as a typical "failure
story", as Russia had prevented the Iran-Armenian gas pipeline from
being extended after Armenia. In fact this was a real success story,
as Russia could as well have simply prevented the construction of the
Iran-Armenia pipeline, thus preserving its own monopoly in the
Armenian gas market. After all, is it realistic for a country like
Armenia to be fully free of dependence on its neighbors? Especially on
one like Russia?


STEREOTYPE TWO: "COMPLEMENTARITY" IS A DREAM

Weinstein, the authors of the ICG report and many others (both in
Armenia and outside) speak about the so-called complementarity, the
key of the Armenian foreign policy, with skepticism if not
irony. "Since Yerevan lacks the resources to execute its
complementarirty policy successfully, that policy has become a hopeful
facade covering continuing dependence on Russia," Weinstein writes.

Since its first days of independence, Armenia has always sought to
keep equally good relations both with Russia and the U.S. (and the
West in general). This policy got the brand name of "complementarity"
in the late 90s. Let's see the results. Armenia is the only country
in the world, which has managed to preserve the status of a military
ally of Russia, and, at the same time, to be one of the largest
recipients of American assistance (for a long period, Armenia was the
third largest recipient in per capita terms, after Israel and
Egypt). In some years, Yerevan managed to pay its bills for the
Russian gas directly with the money provided by the U.S. If this is a
failure, what is the success?


STEREOTYPE THREE: ARMENIA IS NOT ORIENTED TO THE WEST

It is a long-term belief that Georgia and even Azerbaijan are more
inclined to adopt Western orientation than Armenia. Surprising as it
may look, this vision is based on the fact that the West is primarily
interested in contacts with Azerbaijan and Georgia (rather than with
Armenia) due to the oil pipeline now under construction. Another
arguable assumption supporting this belief is that, being a military
ally to Russia, Armenia should inevitably copy Moscow's economy policy
and foreign preferences as well. Such a perception has become even
stronger after the "Rose revolution" in Georgia. "Yerevan's policy of
complementarity contrasts with Tbilisi's pro-Western orientation since
the Rose Revolution and with Baku's "balanced" policy," Weinstein
writes, leaving the natural question "Where is the contrast?"
unanswered.

In reality, the status of a Russian ally hasn't prevented Armenia
from performing extensive economic reforms (according to the estimates
of the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, in terms of
market reforms Armenia is the most advanced country among the
CIS). Contrary to what Weinstein states, Russia has never been
Armenia's main creditor. More than half of Armenia's foreign debt is
loans of the World Bank, i.e., it is made up of the funds provided by
the leading Western countries for economy reforms. As for the
bilateral loans, Russia was the largest creditor before 2002, as it
had provided several high-interest loans in the peak of the economy
crisis in mid-90s. After Yerevan settled this debt with the
debt-for-equity deal (hence making Russia responsible for the proper
work of these assets), Germany has become its largest creditor
country, as it extensively credits economy reconstruction and reforms
in Armenia at very concessive terms. All of these have led the
U.S. to include Armenia in the list of those eligible for getting
funds of the newly established Millennium Challenge Corporation (17
countries were elected among more than 70). Finally, Russia did not
prevent its ally from performing NATO war games in Armenia in 2003 and
from being included into the EU New Neighborhood policy in 2004.


STEREOTYPE FOUR: ARMENIA MAY FACE INSTABILITY

The report of the International Crisis Group contains a sound body
of analysis and recommendations, most of which cannot be
questioned. But, having read the whole report, one may ask, why have
its authors chosen to give it the title: "Armenia: Internal
Instability Ahead."? The fragment relevant to that idea in the report
is: "While the present opposition -- divided and seen by many as more
interested in regaining power than truly fixing the system -- does not
have wide popular resonance, the situation could become much more
explosive if a charismatic leader emerged." Obviously, such a
conclusion does not imply that Armenia is "facing
instability". Meanwhile, the possibility of internal instability in
Armenia is even lower, because what is currently branded as
opposition, i.e., the Ardarutiun (Justice) alliance, is not a real
opposition at all. Rather, it is a part of the current ruling elite
which has separated from it due to the events of the terrorist act of
October 27, 1999, and partly, due to some details of the tactics
towards the Nagorno Artsax problem.

What is even more important, the "opposition" does not enjoy
appreciable support of the country's business community. This is the
key reason why the regime lead by Kocharian has remained stable
(despite the violations and breaching during last year's elections)
and, will, most likely, keep stability in the future, even if a
"charismatic" opponent like Saakashvili or Yushchenko appears. The
only possibility of internal instability in Armenia may be due to some
split in the ruling coalition, but this possibility has not even been
considered in the report.

Hence, I can see no other reason for this alarming title to be
chosen except for the failure of the report's authors to get rid of
stereotypes about an "unstable" Armenia.

Of course, Armenia is far from being a prosperous country with a
stable environment. However, it is regrettable to see that analyses
and media reports often fail to reveal its true problems and tell the
readers about non-existing or forgotten ones.


--
Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing in
economic and political affairs.

[Armen]

TROUBLE BREWING FOR ARMENIA

Azg/arm
15 Jan 05

There is real cause for concern when the major news media in the West
begin to focus on Armenia and dwell on the woes that the country is
experiencing at this time. The articles published in the December 9,
2004 and December 26, 2004 issues of The New York Times and signed by
Susan Sachs don't seem to be coincidental. At the risk of being blamed
for conspiratorial mentality, we will venture to classify this sudden
surge of attention as one of the plots being hatched in that part of
the world.

Ms. Sachs' very titles indicate what she is up to - "For young
Armenians, a promised land without promise", "Armenia's isolation
grows only deeper". Her conclusion cannot be construed as a Freudian
slip, as she says, "The prospects appear grim without outside
intervention". "Outside intervention" is the buzzwords about the
impending dangers that the country should anticipate. The fact that
Armenia's economic liberalization has put the country on the higher
gear of growth has not impressed the writer enough so that she has
taken the pains to interview some destitute and disgruntled youth to
substantiate her grim predictions about Armenia. We have no reason to
doubt the veracity of the complaints. But ignoring the growth of
Armenia's domestic product (13% in 2002 and 15% in 2004), which placed
the country among the fastest growing economies of former Soviet
Republics, to draw a desperate picture certainly has a political
motivation behind. On the other hand, Azerbaijan, with all its oil
resources, lives in abject misery under a medieval despotic rule, yet
it fails to attract the attention of The New York Times; nor has
neighboring Georgia, which, despite its "rose revolution", has been
torn in three directions and has plunged into an energy crisis.

Those New York Times articles only echo and complement another article
signed recently by David Phillips in The Wall Street Journal
pontificating that Armenia can live in peace and prosperity ever after
at the tender mercies of neighboring Turkey by removing the Russian
military bases from its territory.

These two influential publications, which have shown sudden interest
in Armenia's plight failed to report the demonstration of ten thousand
European Armenians, who recently converged to Brussels to protest
Turkey's accessiontalks with the European Union. That huge
demonstration was not deemed newsworthy.

To complete the mosaic of the political machinations we should also
refer to another initiative, which took place recently, when the
former President Levon Ter-Petrossian was pulled out of his
self-imposed isolation to rub shoulders with incumbent and former US
Presidents at the inauguration of President Clinton's library. That
was also a not so subtle message to the rulers in Yerevan.

It is very obvious that post-Cold War new world order is being set on
two different levels; by force or by subversion. Yugoslavia was
dismembered under false pretense and Iraq was occupied to serve
Israel's political needs â=80` at the cost of American money and
blood. On the other hand, colorful "revolutions" began burgeoning in
different parts of the world: Thus the "rose revolution" propelled an
inexperienced young lawyer to the presidency of Georgia (after
"peacefully" smashing the parliament gates). The "orange revolution"
brought Yushenko to power in Ukraine by cutting Russia to size. The
Cold war is continuing under a different guise. Yet still the name of
the game is to contain Russia into its ever-shrinking territory.

Unfortunately, Armenia is caught in this geo-strategic chess game, and
hopefully any revolution that is being concocted in the dark will not
turn out to be a "red revolution".

Recently the Kocharian administration was cornered to test the
validity of its "complementarist" foreign policy by forcing it to send
a symbolic number of troops to Iraq to join the occupation forces,
which have a fig leaf called "the coalition".

Armenia's government was caught between a rock and a hard place. Since
Azerbaijan was being lavishly rewarded for its participation in, and
position on the Iraq war, Armenia was challenged to match Baku's
commitments to the West. Therefore, the government in Armenia
grudgingly agreed to participate in the occupation of Iraq, with the
full knowledge that it was jeopardizing the lives of Armenians living,
not only in Iraq, but also in the entire Muslim world. Even before the
Armenian contingent set foot in Iraq, the warning shots were already
heard when the Armenian churches were bombed. We need to brace for
further trouble in the Arab world, where Armenians were received with
open arms in the aftermath of the Genocide.

All those developments seem to be components of a similar design to
drive Armenia to further concessions vis-Ã -vis Turkey and Azerbaijan
or drive the country to extinction. This, by no means, must be
construed as extreme pessimism, since The New York Times article has
made a specific reference in that direction. Indeed, Ms. Sachs has
found a young male activist in the town ofGumry who has conveniently
stated, "If nothing changes, Armenia will be left as an
island...everyone will forget Armenia".

The New York Times editor has gleefully quoted the young man's
statement, which is very much in tune with the thrust of her articles.

All these articles and other developments seem to be the tip of the
iceberg. Much seems to be in store yet.

Hopefully, the future is not that grim. We cannot allow it to be grim.

By Charlotte Vande, 1/11/05

[Sasun]

The
Cold war is continuing under a different guise. Yet still the name of
the game is to contain Russia into its ever-shrinking territory.

In that case it is no longer a cold war, but a one sided imperialism. Cold war had two imperialism's containing each other.

[Sasun]

By the way, who is Charlotte Vande? Could it be a pseudonim?

[Armen]

http://www.nysun.com/article/18286

Second-Largest Recipients of U.S. Aid, Armenians Fight To Get Ahead
BY MICHAEL MAINVILLE - Special to the Sun
August 9, 2005
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/18286

YEREVAN, Armenia - A close ally of Russia, with a grossly corrupt economy and a ruler accused of increasing authoritarianism, Armenia hardly seems a prime candidate for massive doses of American aid money.

Yet this tiny South Caucasus republic receives more American aid per capita than any other country except Israel - a total of more than $1.6 billion since 1992. When the White House tried to cut sizably American assistance to Armenia earlier this summer, Congress blocked the move, bumping up the administration's allocation from $55 million to $75 million for 2006.

Armenians can thank one of the most effective and well-organized ethnic lobbies on Capitol Hill for the windfall. With wealthy backing and strong grassroots support, America's million-strong Armenian population, concentrated in the Northeast and California, has for years successfully lobbied for increased aid.

At the time of its independence after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia seemed a dream come true for a people with a tragic history. Less than a century after the Armenian genocide - when the Turks killed between 500,000 and 1.5 million Armenians - the world's 4 million ethnic Armenians finally had a national homeland.

But instead of thriving - and despite the money pouring in from foreign donors - Armenia is languishing. Its politics are moribund, dominated by President Kocharian, whom critics accuse of falsifying elections and cracking down on the opposition. And despite years of significant growth, its economy remains in shambles, with nearly half the population living on less than $2 a day.

The result has been a mass exodus - the reverse of early hopes for Armenia. Instead of hundreds of thousands of dispersed Armenians flocking to the country, more than 1 million Armenians have left for Russia and the West, leaving Armenia with a population of less than 3 million. According to some estimates, the country has lost more than 30% of its working-age population.

"People are leaving because they don't see any hope for the future," the chairman of human rights group Helsinki Committee of Armenia, Avetik Ishkanyan, said. "And the worst part is that the ones who are leaving are from the most active part of society - these are the people we need to bring about changes in this country."

Critics lay much of the blame at Mr. Kocharian's feet. They say that the president - elected for a second time in 2003 - is running a corrupt and despotic regime, giving free rein to businessmen close to him and stifling any dissent.

"There is a huge gap between those in power and the majority of Armenian society," said the leader of the opposition Justice coalition, Stepan Demirchian, who is also the son of a Kocharian rival killed in 1999 when gunmen attacked Parliament and shot several prominent politicians. "And when we try to resist, when we try to bring democratic change, they respond with violence."

In April 2004, inspired by the peaceful Rose Revolution in neighboring Georgia, thousands of Armenians took to the streets to denounce Mr. Kocharian and voting fraud in the 2003 elections. After more than 50,000 people demonstrated on April 12 and 13, Mr. Kocharian called in the police to break up the protest with stun grenades and water cannons.

Government officials insist the crackdown was needed to maintain order and say opposition parties are simply trying to seize power for themselves.

The foreign minister, Vardan Oskanyan, said the opposition uses the pretense of supporting democracy to gain support abroad as they attempt to overthrow the government. He said he knows that Armenia's democracy is not perfect, but believes it is improving.

"The government is stable, and the country is on the path to becoming a fully democratic country," he said. "A lot has been done, but a lot remains to be done."

Under pressure from the West, Armenia will hold a national referendum this year on a package of constitutional amendments designed to limit the power of the presidency and protect judicial independence. Mr. Oskanyan said the reforms will be key to ensuring democratic and economic growth.

"Once we complete our constitutional reforms, Armenia will move forward in leaps and bounds," he said.

Opposition leaders see things differently. They say the reforms are only symbolic and see the referendum as a potential trigger for the kind of mass protests that drove out authoritarian governments in Georgia and Ukraine.

The leader of the radical Republic Party, Aram Sarkisian, said opposition parties are gearing up to organize mass demonstrations after the referendum, which he said is sure to be fraudulent.

"The situation in our country is terrible, people are leaving because they have no hope," he said. "Armenian society is ready for revolutionary change, peaceful and civilized change."

Mr. Sarkisian said he met with White House and State Department officials during a June trip to Washington and emerged confident of American support for a revolution.

"The United States supported the Georgians and the Ukrainians, and they will help the Armenian people," he said.

Still, experts said it's unlikely the opposition could organize a successful revolution or win Western support. Fractured by in-fighting and with no clear leader, the opposition is more likely to fall apart before posing any threat to Mr. Kocharian.

"The opposition is too weak and the government is just democratic enough to keep the West from supporting drastic changes," said a Western official in Yerevan, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Chatting over rich coffees and ice-cold Coca-Colas in Yerevan's trendy ArtBridge Cafe, a group of students and recent graduates agreed that a revolution is next to impossible.

Unlike so many other young Armenians, they've decided to stay and try to build their country.

"I will not leave Armenia, I want do to things for my country, make it a better place to live," a 26-year-old university lecturer, Artak Ayunts, said.

But the group was skeptical about radical changes. They don't believe Armenians are ready for a revolution and say it could take decades of slow progress before the country is free and relatively prosperous.

"People don't believe in themselves, they think someone else should always make changes for them," Mr. Ayunts said.

Joked a 28-year-old student, Gevorg Abrahamyan: "The biggest problem with Armenia is the Armenians."