Not everything in the world is propaganda. Read eyewitness accounts and make a judgement of what's right and wrong. Everyone should have it's own definition of righteousness. Unfortunately there are still people who try to find excuses to inexcusible acts of beating and violence.
http://www.armeniano...ition/index.asp
Hell Night: A victim’s story of police brutality
By Zhanna Alexanyan
ArmeniaNow reporter
Ani Kirakosyan is 22. She will not let us take her photograph, because she is afraid. By her accounts of what happened to her during a police crack down on Armenia’s political opposition, her fear is justified.
Ani got a degree in journalism at Yerevan Pedagogic Institute and after graduation was offered a job collecting information for the online magazine of the Republic party.
On the evening of April 13, Ani was in the headquarters of the party. It is oppositional leader Aram Sargsyan’s office, but Ani is not a member of the party and says she is apolitical. For her, the work is a job, not a passion.
Police raided the office where Ani works during a sweep of oppositional members ordered by authorities on a night when hundreds were attacked with water canon, percussion grenades and beaten by police with batons.
At about 2 a.m., police reached the Republic party headquarters near the Opera House.
First, police took away the men in the office. Then they came back for the women. Ani was one of 13.
“We switched off the lights and were waiting,” says Ani. “I was terribly afraid. When police officers began beating a woman under our window, I approached the widow as I decided to help that woman. But at that very moment they began fiercely knocking at our door.”
One man was left in the office, Artak Zeinalyan a disabled veteran who lost his left leg in the war in Artsax. He tried to intervene when police came in, but was pushed to the floor.
“They were cursing us and roughly dragging us into a car,” Ani recalls. “There was an elderly woman with us who was feeling very bad. We asked them to at least let her go but they refused.”
When Ani asked: “Where are you taking us?” A policeman replied: “I don't know. Somewhere, where we find spare place.”
Lockup was at a premium that early Tuesday morning as an estimated 400 arrests were made. More would follow.
The women were taken to the Erebuni Community Police Department. Ani was questioned by an officer named Grigor Mitoyan.
“First, Mitoyan entered the room with four or five policemen then a high-ranking policeman came and everybody stood,” Ani recalls. “I was sitting and watching. I didn't know what would happen next. He approached me and kicked me: ‘Stand up, I say!' I stood up and he began kicking my legs, belly and hitting my face with his hands. I was crying but I didn't say anything. He was cursing us using profanity toward me. I was so scared that I urinated on myself.”
Ani says she was beaten for about 10 or 15 minutes by an officer named Poghosyan. One of the women in the group identified him as Kamsar Poghosyan, deputy head of the department.
When that officer left the room, other officers gave Ani water and warm clothes.
“I asked what I did and why he beat me? He could have had a daughter of my age. Policemen told me that nobody beat me and it was only my imagination.”
In a few minutes she heard shouts and curses coming from a corridor. The policemen quickly took away the warm clothes and water from Ani. At that moment head of Erebuni Community's Police Department Nver Hovhannisyan entered the room.
“I don’t remember, at that moment I was standing . . . He came at me in a fury and was kicking me. I urinated on myself three times. I dropped on my knees, I was crying: ‘What have I done, why are you beating me?’,” Ani says.
“You were at demonstration, I saw you there,” she recalls the head of police saying. “You were standing in the front rows. So you wanted to change the president?”
“I told him he mistook me for someone else,” Ani says. But he continued to kick my back and belly.”
Ani says the department chief threatened that “he would bring all his policemen and they would rape me or he would arrest me”.
One of the 13 women, Oghide Harutyunyan, was taken to police department with her 19-year-old daughter. They were kept in the department for 36 hours, in separate places.
Harutyunyan, 45, has a degree in law. She previously held the rank of major in the Ministry of Defense.
She says she tried to defend the women by telling police of their rights. She says a policeman told her: “Don’t you live in Armenia? The law is at the top. We do whatever we are told to do.”
From a floor above her, Harutyunyan heard screaming and feared it was her daughter. (She and her daughter were also beaten by Hovhannisyan, she says.)
“I could clearly hear horrid yells of a girl coming from the third floor. I didn't know whether it was my daughter crying or someone else. Later I knew it was Ani Kirakosyan,” Harutyunyan says.
When Hovhannisyan left the room (according to Ani, he was beating her longer than the deputy head) Ani continued to cry loudly. One policemen asked her not to cry so loudly. “If he hears you crying, he’ll return and beat you again,” the policeman said.
Eventually, police took Ani to the Erebuni Medical Center.
In a waiting room one of the nurses saw bruises on the girl’s legs and back. The nurse asked Ani if she had fallen.
“I said I was beaten in the police department,” Ani says. “A doctor, who was present during the conversation, interrupted the nurse and was treating me roughly. I saw an investigator waiting in the lobby.”
Ani, afraid that she had passed out during the worst of her experience, asked to be examined by a gynecologist. She was denied.
She was examined by sonogram, then asked to pay 5000-6000 drams (about $9-$11), however, Ani said she had no money with her.
She was discharged, but not given documents of her examination.
“I never knew what had happened with me,” Ani says. “They said everything is ok but their faces said completely different things to me.”
(Ani is currently recovering at home. She suffers acute abdominal pains and doctors say her internal organs are bruised.)
When Ani left the hospital she saw her parents and relatives waiting at the entrance. However, an investigator didn’t allow her to talk with them and again she was taken to Erebuni Police Department.
After spending 15 hours in the Police Department seven women were gathered in one room. “All of them were beaten but not so much as I was,” Ani says. “There was a woman among them, who was also beaten very fiercely. All of us were crying.”
At 7 p.m. five women, including Ani, were let go.
When Ani tried to find out why only five had been set free policemen told her: “Because you are not guilty”.
Editor’s note: Twice during the preparation of this article, ArmeniaNow made attempts through police department officials to verify the claims of women in this article. We told a police spokesperson that allegations were being made, and that members of the department should be given an opportunity to respond.
Sarkis Martirossyan, Head of Operations at Erebuni Police Department “categorically rejects the fact of women being beaten” at the department.
Press and Public Relations Department of the Republic of Armenia Police Mushegh Kroyan told ArmeniaNow: “If these women were subjected to acts of violence, then let them go to the law. It is natural that policemen of Erebuni Police Department will not confess that they had beaten them.”
Revolution
Started by
-=VAHE=-
, Apr 06 2004 12:23 AM
113 replies to this topic
#102
alpha
-
- Members
-
- 254 posts
Member
Posted 26 April 2004 - 06:32 PM
Those of you that claim that beating protestors is common in democratic countries, the recent demonstarion in Washington DC is just a proof that demonstration is an accepted means of expressing a decent and dissatisfaction. Isn't Kocharyan and the ruling junta surprised that nobody got hurt in a pro-abortion demonstration in Washington DC. It's amazing how calmly the slogans like ''We are here to take back our country.'' are accepted in democratic countries.
Abortion-rights march targets Bush
By Kristina Herrndobler, Washington Bureau. Tribune news services contributed to this report.
891 words
26 April 2004
Chicago Tribune
Chicagoland Final
1
English
Copyright 2004, Chicago Tribune. All Rights Reserved.
WASHINGTON
Abortion-rights activists turned out by the hundreds of thousands Sunday, packing the National Mall with a sea of pink signs and a warning to the White House that they will go to the polls in November.
The ACLU and Planned Parenthood, along with about 1,400 other organizations, organized the March for Women's Lives after a series of legislative setbacks that they say could lead to a reversal of Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.
The march was one of the biggest ever on the Mall. Organizers said the crowd was much larger than at the 1992 March for Women's Lives, which National Park Police said drew about 500,000. The Park Police no longer gives official crowd counts, but the Associated Press quoted police sources as informally estimating the number at 500,000 to 800,000.
Representatives from at least 56 countries joined American men and women from across the nation at the march, saying the Bush administration's anti-abortion policies affect women everywhere.
Speakers including actress Susan Sarandon and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright blamed White House policies for the deaths of thousands of women worldwide--caused, they said, by the ban on federal funding for family-planning groups that work abroad to provide information about abortions or perform them.
Although organizers said the march was non-partisan, thousands wore Kerry for President stickers.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) urged the crowd to help elect John Kerry. Recalling the election of her husband, President Bill Clinton, she noted that the last time such a march was held, in 1992, "we elected a pro-choice president, and this year we must do the same."
Activists said the march was not just about abortion but also about access to health care, family planning and justice.
Holding a wire hanger in front of the crowd, actress Whoopi Goldberg spoke about what she called a generation of women under 30 who don't understand the significance of the hanger--sometimes the tool for illegal back-alley abortions before the Supreme Court's ruling.
"This is what we used," Goldberg said. "But never again will this be the choice of anyone in our hemisphere, in our world. Never again."
Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, said the vast majority of Roman Catholic women in America support a woman's right to choose.
"We will not put up with religious leaders who tell women they don't have the right to control their own destiny," Kissling said. "Not the church, not the state -- women will control their own fate."
Michelle Williams of Wilmette, Ill., joined her mother, Lenore Zake of Palm Beach, Fla., at the march. The women, in homemade "Freedom" shirts, attended an ACLU-sponsored breakfast for Illinois activists Sunday. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) received a standing ovation after she addressed the large crowd.
"We are marching as if our lives depend on it because they do," Schakowsky said.
Williams, a middle-school art teacher and mother of two daughters, said women deserve the right to make decisions about their families.
Williams, now 52, had an abortion when she was 28. She said it was the right decision for her at the time, and she supports the right of other women to make the same decisions.
"Unwanted children breed criminals and other problems in our society," Williams said.
As the activists made their way from the kickoff breakfast to the Mall, they were met by about 200 counter protesters.
Brandi Swindell, the national director of Generation Life, said the post-Roe vs. Wade generation should stand up for the dignity of life. The group, which does not believe in the use of oral contraceptives, said unmarried people should abstain from sex and married couples should use condoms if they want to avoid pregnancy.
"There is no such thing as a safe abortion," Swindell said. "A little boy or girl dies and it is terrible on a woman's body."
Students from Smith College in Northampton, Mass., filled four buses Saturday night, sleeping uncomfortably through the eight-hour trip.
Ashley Barton, a freshman, said some of the students questioned their decision midway through the trip.
"I kept telling them it will be worth it when we get there," Barton said. "And I am really glad we came because I don't think they can really ignore something this size."
The rally's size--estimated at 500,000 to 800,000 by police sources but put as high as 1.15 million by organizers--was in a league with few other demonstrations on the Mall. Among them: the 1995 Million Man March, which drew 800,000, according to independent researchers; a rally after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, which drew about 800,000, and a 1997 Promise Keepers gathering that attracted 480,000 to 750,000.
Abortion-rights march targets Bush
By Kristina Herrndobler, Washington Bureau. Tribune news services contributed to this report.
891 words
26 April 2004
Chicago Tribune
Chicagoland Final
1
English
Copyright 2004, Chicago Tribune. All Rights Reserved.
WASHINGTON
Abortion-rights activists turned out by the hundreds of thousands Sunday, packing the National Mall with a sea of pink signs and a warning to the White House that they will go to the polls in November.
The ACLU and Planned Parenthood, along with about 1,400 other organizations, organized the March for Women's Lives after a series of legislative setbacks that they say could lead to a reversal of Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.
The march was one of the biggest ever on the Mall. Organizers said the crowd was much larger than at the 1992 March for Women's Lives, which National Park Police said drew about 500,000. The Park Police no longer gives official crowd counts, but the Associated Press quoted police sources as informally estimating the number at 500,000 to 800,000.
Representatives from at least 56 countries joined American men and women from across the nation at the march, saying the Bush administration's anti-abortion policies affect women everywhere.
Speakers including actress Susan Sarandon and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright blamed White House policies for the deaths of thousands of women worldwide--caused, they said, by the ban on federal funding for family-planning groups that work abroad to provide information about abortions or perform them.
Although organizers said the march was non-partisan, thousands wore Kerry for President stickers.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) urged the crowd to help elect John Kerry. Recalling the election of her husband, President Bill Clinton, she noted that the last time such a march was held, in 1992, "we elected a pro-choice president, and this year we must do the same."
Activists said the march was not just about abortion but also about access to health care, family planning and justice.
Holding a wire hanger in front of the crowd, actress Whoopi Goldberg spoke about what she called a generation of women under 30 who don't understand the significance of the hanger--sometimes the tool for illegal back-alley abortions before the Supreme Court's ruling.
"This is what we used," Goldberg said. "But never again will this be the choice of anyone in our hemisphere, in our world. Never again."
Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, said the vast majority of Roman Catholic women in America support a woman's right to choose.
"We will not put up with religious leaders who tell women they don't have the right to control their own destiny," Kissling said. "Not the church, not the state -- women will control their own fate."
Michelle Williams of Wilmette, Ill., joined her mother, Lenore Zake of Palm Beach, Fla., at the march. The women, in homemade "Freedom" shirts, attended an ACLU-sponsored breakfast for Illinois activists Sunday. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) received a standing ovation after she addressed the large crowd.
"We are marching as if our lives depend on it because they do," Schakowsky said.
Williams, a middle-school art teacher and mother of two daughters, said women deserve the right to make decisions about their families.
Williams, now 52, had an abortion when she was 28. She said it was the right decision for her at the time, and she supports the right of other women to make the same decisions.
"Unwanted children breed criminals and other problems in our society," Williams said.
As the activists made their way from the kickoff breakfast to the Mall, they were met by about 200 counter protesters.
Brandi Swindell, the national director of Generation Life, said the post-Roe vs. Wade generation should stand up for the dignity of life. The group, which does not believe in the use of oral contraceptives, said unmarried people should abstain from sex and married couples should use condoms if they want to avoid pregnancy.
"There is no such thing as a safe abortion," Swindell said. "A little boy or girl dies and it is terrible on a woman's body."
Students from Smith College in Northampton, Mass., filled four buses Saturday night, sleeping uncomfortably through the eight-hour trip.
Ashley Barton, a freshman, said some of the students questioned their decision midway through the trip.
"I kept telling them it will be worth it when we get there," Barton said. "And I am really glad we came because I don't think they can really ignore something this size."
The rally's size--estimated at 500,000 to 800,000 by police sources but put as high as 1.15 million by organizers--was in a league with few other demonstrations on the Mall. Among them: the 1995 Million Man March, which drew 800,000, according to independent researchers; a rally after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, which drew about 800,000, and a 1997 Promise Keepers gathering that attracted 480,000 to 750,000.
#103
ARR
-
- Members
-
- 82 posts
Member
- Location:Armenia
Posted 27 April 2004 - 10:38 AM
www.artsakhtert.com
ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ ЛЕКСИКОН ОБОГАЩАЕТСЯ ОПАСНЫМИ СЛОВОСОЧЕТАНИЯМИ
Митинги оппозиции Армении сопровождаются оскорбительными заявлениями в адрес Карабаха. В Армении проводится последовательная политика дискредитации идеи Карабаха. Делается ли это волей или неволей - неважно. Факт,что в народе укореняется враждебность к арцахцам. Тенденция эта не нова, опасны новые ее проявления. Еще в 1998 году лидеры НДС заявляли на митингах на площади Свободы, что пока в Армении часть власти находится в руках уроженцев Карабаха, демократии в стране не будет. До этого же первый президент Армении Левон Тер-Петросян, под давлением известных сил заявивший о своей отставке, охарактеризовал приходящих к власти людей "партией войны", что, естественно, было воспринято международным сообществом неоднозначно. К сожалению, эти слова прозвучали из уст первого лица государства, пришедшего к власти, как и его товарищи, на волне Карабахского движения и, стало быть, находящиеся в долгу перед Карабахом. В последние годы усилиями члена правления АОД Давида Шахназаряна в армянском политическом лексиконе появилось также непозволительное выражение "карабахский клан". На сегодняшних митингах упомянутое словосочетание стало важнейшей частью выступлений Арташеса Гегамяна, Виктора Даллакяна, Шаварша Кочаряна и других, в свое время обвинявших АОД во всех смертных грехах. Сегодняшняя оппозиция многослойна. Ряды требующих отставки Роберта Кочаряна пестры - коммунисты, АОДовцы, НДС и его осколки, бывшие республиканцы, участники Карабахской борьбы. Обратите внимание: выступающие на митингах азатамартики никогда не употребляют выражение "карабахский клан". Наоборот, его произносят те ораторы, которые в годы Карабахской войны успешно занимались бизнесом и плевать хотели на мнение "недоедающего" народа и проливающих кровь азатамартиков. Лидер "Национального единства" Арташес Гегамян на днях в одной из газет обогатил политический лексикон еще одним непозволительным выражением в адрес президента Кочаряна: "Все равно рано или поздно он предстанет перед Европейским судом по правам человека, причем не статусе свидетеля, а обвиняемого". Не исключено, что со временем мечтающий о троне Гегамян изъявит желание увидеть Кочаряна в статусе обвиняемого в Гаагском суде по военным преступлениям. Пожалуй, не случайно и то, что некоторые средства массовой информации Армении с удовольствием перепечатывают статьи из азербайджанских СМИ, в которых отмечаются перспективы привлечения президента Кочаряна и других активных участников Карабахской войны к ответственности в Гаагском суде по военным преступлениям.
ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ ЛЕКСИКОН ОБОГАЩАЕТСЯ ОПАСНЫМИ СЛОВОСОЧЕТАНИЯМИ
Митинги оппозиции Армении сопровождаются оскорбительными заявлениями в адрес Карабаха. В Армении проводится последовательная политика дискредитации идеи Карабаха. Делается ли это волей или неволей - неважно. Факт,что в народе укореняется враждебность к арцахцам. Тенденция эта не нова, опасны новые ее проявления. Еще в 1998 году лидеры НДС заявляли на митингах на площади Свободы, что пока в Армении часть власти находится в руках уроженцев Карабаха, демократии в стране не будет. До этого же первый президент Армении Левон Тер-Петросян, под давлением известных сил заявивший о своей отставке, охарактеризовал приходящих к власти людей "партией войны", что, естественно, было воспринято международным сообществом неоднозначно. К сожалению, эти слова прозвучали из уст первого лица государства, пришедшего к власти, как и его товарищи, на волне Карабахского движения и, стало быть, находящиеся в долгу перед Карабахом. В последние годы усилиями члена правления АОД Давида Шахназаряна в армянском политическом лексиконе появилось также непозволительное выражение "карабахский клан". На сегодняшних митингах упомянутое словосочетание стало важнейшей частью выступлений Арташеса Гегамяна, Виктора Даллакяна, Шаварша Кочаряна и других, в свое время обвинявших АОД во всех смертных грехах. Сегодняшняя оппозиция многослойна. Ряды требующих отставки Роберта Кочаряна пестры - коммунисты, АОДовцы, НДС и его осколки, бывшие республиканцы, участники Карабахской борьбы. Обратите внимание: выступающие на митингах азатамартики никогда не употребляют выражение "карабахский клан". Наоборот, его произносят те ораторы, которые в годы Карабахской войны успешно занимались бизнесом и плевать хотели на мнение "недоедающего" народа и проливающих кровь азатамартиков. Лидер "Национального единства" Арташес Гегамян на днях в одной из газет обогатил политический лексикон еще одним непозволительным выражением в адрес президента Кочаряна: "Все равно рано или поздно он предстанет перед Европейским судом по правам человека, причем не статусе свидетеля, а обвиняемого". Не исключено, что со временем мечтающий о троне Гегамян изъявит желание увидеть Кочаряна в статусе обвиняемого в Гаагском суде по военным преступлениям. Пожалуй, не случайно и то, что некоторые средства массовой информации Армении с удовольствием перепечатывают статьи из азербайджанских СМИ, в которых отмечаются перспективы привлечения президента Кочаряна и других активных участников Карабахской войны к ответственности в Гаагском суде по военным преступлениям.
#104
ARR
-
- Members
-
- 82 posts
Member
- Location:Armenia
Posted 28 April 2004 - 03:58 PM
“The Council of Europe supports the dialogue between the authorities and the opposition, and has a successful experience of sponsoring it in various countries,” Schwimmer told a news conference in Strasbourg. He said his permanent representative in Yerevan, Natalia Voutova, is ready to assist in arranging direct contacts between the two sides.
A draft PACE resolution drawn up by a committee monitoring Armenia’s compliance with its membership commitments condemns the crack down, ill-treatment, restriction on freedom of expression, and unjustified restrictions by police and authorities.
Its draft resolution also explicitly states that the Armenian opposition “should refrain from attempts to use street demonstrations to reverse the results of last year’s elections, which have been, in spite of the irregularities, validated by relevant national and international bodies.” Schwimmer likewise urged the opposition to “return to parliament from the streets.”
Source: RFE/RL
I absolutely agree with the resolution by Council of Europe. However they should have stressed the fact of presidential election being validated more explicitly in the first place after elections, then continually brag about irregularities. We all know that irregularities happened and need to be stopped in the future. No body seems to disagree with that. But what became a subject to wishful interpretations by the opposition is the outcome of the elections. Both Geghamian and Demrichian claimed they got 70% of votes each…?? Apparently Council of Europe has misjudged about common sense of the opposition.
A draft PACE resolution drawn up by a committee monitoring Armenia’s compliance with its membership commitments condemns the crack down, ill-treatment, restriction on freedom of expression, and unjustified restrictions by police and authorities.
Its draft resolution also explicitly states that the Armenian opposition “should refrain from attempts to use street demonstrations to reverse the results of last year’s elections, which have been, in spite of the irregularities, validated by relevant national and international bodies.” Schwimmer likewise urged the opposition to “return to parliament from the streets.”
Source: RFE/RL
I absolutely agree with the resolution by Council of Europe. However they should have stressed the fact of presidential election being validated more explicitly in the first place after elections, then continually brag about irregularities. We all know that irregularities happened and need to be stopped in the future. No body seems to disagree with that. But what became a subject to wishful interpretations by the opposition is the outcome of the elections. Both Geghamian and Demrichian claimed they got 70% of votes each…?? Apparently Council of Europe has misjudged about common sense of the opposition.
#105
alpha
-
- Members
-
- 254 posts
Member
Posted 29 April 2004 - 11:39 AM
The same Council of Europe also advised authorities to learn from Shevardnadze and not to use force against its own people. If Armenian authorities do not abide bo the obligations they undertook before being admitted to the Council of Europe embarrassing expulstion of Armenia from the Council will not let itself wait for too long. Now we have political prisoners in Armenia and people are beaten up for protesting. Just ask yourselves, does such a country belong to Europe when it does not adhere to European values. With current ruling regime we resemble more Syria or Turkey, then any other country.
Council Of Europe Assembly Threatens Sanctions Against Yerevan
By Emil Danielyan, Hrach Melkumian and Ruzanna Khachatrian
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has warned the Armenian authorities to end their crackdown on the opposition and immediately release all political prisoners or face embarrassing sanctions later this year.
In a resolution adopted late Wednesday, the PACE denounced the government’s heavy-handed response to the opposition campaign for President Robert Kocharian’s resignation, saying that it is “contrary to the letter and the spirit” of its earlier recommendations to Yerevan. The Strasbourg lawmakers also dropped from the initial version of the resolution a clause that discouraged the Armenian opposition from challenging Kocharian’s disputed reelection with street protests.
The resolution, drafted by a committee monitoring the 45 member states’ compliance with their commitments, demanded that the authorities scrap “unjustified restrictions” on peaceful demonstrations, release the individuals detained for their participation in the recent anti-Kocharian rallies, investigate the “human rights abuses” and “inform the Assembly of their findings and possible legal actions against people responsible.” It called in this regard for an “immediate end” to the renewed enforcement of Armenia’s controversial Administrative Code under which dozens of opposition supporters have been imprisonment this month.
The PACE also urged the authorities to “guarantee freedom of movement inside Armenia,” an apparent reference to the effective disruption of public transport communication between Yerevan and the rest of the country ahead of virtually every opposition rally. The extraordinary measure has been aimed at preventing provincial residents from swelling the opposition crowds.
The resolution says the government in Yerevan should submit by next June a written report to the PACE detailing the steps it has taken in response to the recommendations. Their implementation will be assessed by the monitoring committee’s two Armenia rapporteurs, Rene Andre of France and Jerzy Jaskiernia of Poland. They were instructed to make a fact-finding trip to the country “as soon as appropriate.”
The resolution warns that if Yerevan makes no progress in addressing these concerns, the PACE will “reconsider the credentials of the Armenian delegation” at its autumn session next September.
Presenting the document to the Strasbourg lawmakers, Jaskiernia made it clear that while he strongly disapproves of the crackdown, he believes that the Council of Europe should not question the legitimacy of last year’s Armenian presidential and parliamentary elections because the serious fraud that marred them was “not so extensive that we could disqualify the result.” “The election naturally delivered results, and now many people are satisfied, so our approach to Armenia should be objective and balanced,” he said.
The remarks drew criticism from some of the parliamentarians attending the debate, notably Hungary's Matyas Eorsi who has monitored Armenian polls in the past. "On the one hand, there are demonstrators who want to achieve certain political goals and, on the other hand, there is a state that wants to suppress the demonstrators," he said. "We do not need to be balanced about that."
"It is difficult for us to make decisions if the factual evidence is not presented to us objectively,” complained Malcolm Bruce, a British lawmaker.
Eorsi drew parallels between the Armenian crisis and the situation in Georgia during the November “rose revolution,” saying that Yerevan should “learn” from deposed President Eduard Shevardnadze’s decision not to use force against protesters. “This should stop now,” he continued. “If it does not, we will have to make a decision about whether such a country is suitable to be a member of the Council of Europe.”
Eorsi was instrumental in the PACE’s decision to change a paragraph which said the Armenian opposition “should refrain from attempts to use street demonstrations to reverse the results of last year’s elections.” Its revised version only urges the opposition to “strive to achieve its goals within the constitutional framework.”
The Armenian members of the PACE representing Kocharian’s governing coalition tried unsuccessfully to block the change. But they did succeed in keeping a passage that the 2003 vote irregularities “did not decisively change the outcome of the elections nor invalidate their final results” in the adopted text.
The assembly also rejected a proposal to endorse the idea of the national vote of confidence in Kocharian floated by Armenia’s Constitutional Court last year. But it at the same time did not state explicitly that such a referendum must not be held.
“The Assembly calls upon the authorities and the opposition to refrain from any action which may lead to further violence and to engage in a dialogue without preconditions,” the resolution reads. Still, it admits that “there seems to be little room for dialogue between the authorities and the opposition” at present.
The PACE calls seem to have satisfied both the opposition and the three pro-presidential parties making up Armenia’s coalition government.
“That is certainly in tune with the opposition demands,” Stepan Demirchian, the leader of the Artarutyun alliance, told reporters. “They are not subject to negotiation, they are simply constitutional norms that must be respected.”
“If it weren’t for the international community, I think the regime’s efforts to cling to power would be much more brutal in Armenia,” said Vazgen Manukian, another leading member of the block.
But Galust Sahakian, the parliamentary leader of Prime Minister Andranik Markarian’s Republican Party, downplayed the significance of the PACE criticism. “In essence, nothing new was added to the proposals made by the PACE in January,” he said.
“We expected such a reaction. We also see our approaches reflected in those provisions,” said Hrair Karapetian of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, another governing party.
Both Sahakian and Karapetian urged the opposition leaders to resume their talks with the ruling coalition which broke down on Tuesday. But Demirchian brushed aside the calls.
“As long as we don’t see certain practical steps, it will be unserious and pointless to talk about a dialogue,” he said, adding that the opposition will continue to fight for regime change “in a peaceful way.”
Council Of Europe Assembly Threatens Sanctions Against Yerevan
By Emil Danielyan, Hrach Melkumian and Ruzanna Khachatrian
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has warned the Armenian authorities to end their crackdown on the opposition and immediately release all political prisoners or face embarrassing sanctions later this year.
In a resolution adopted late Wednesday, the PACE denounced the government’s heavy-handed response to the opposition campaign for President Robert Kocharian’s resignation, saying that it is “contrary to the letter and the spirit” of its earlier recommendations to Yerevan. The Strasbourg lawmakers also dropped from the initial version of the resolution a clause that discouraged the Armenian opposition from challenging Kocharian’s disputed reelection with street protests.
The resolution, drafted by a committee monitoring the 45 member states’ compliance with their commitments, demanded that the authorities scrap “unjustified restrictions” on peaceful demonstrations, release the individuals detained for their participation in the recent anti-Kocharian rallies, investigate the “human rights abuses” and “inform the Assembly of their findings and possible legal actions against people responsible.” It called in this regard for an “immediate end” to the renewed enforcement of Armenia’s controversial Administrative Code under which dozens of opposition supporters have been imprisonment this month.
The PACE also urged the authorities to “guarantee freedom of movement inside Armenia,” an apparent reference to the effective disruption of public transport communication between Yerevan and the rest of the country ahead of virtually every opposition rally. The extraordinary measure has been aimed at preventing provincial residents from swelling the opposition crowds.
The resolution says the government in Yerevan should submit by next June a written report to the PACE detailing the steps it has taken in response to the recommendations. Their implementation will be assessed by the monitoring committee’s two Armenia rapporteurs, Rene Andre of France and Jerzy Jaskiernia of Poland. They were instructed to make a fact-finding trip to the country “as soon as appropriate.”
The resolution warns that if Yerevan makes no progress in addressing these concerns, the PACE will “reconsider the credentials of the Armenian delegation” at its autumn session next September.
Presenting the document to the Strasbourg lawmakers, Jaskiernia made it clear that while he strongly disapproves of the crackdown, he believes that the Council of Europe should not question the legitimacy of last year’s Armenian presidential and parliamentary elections because the serious fraud that marred them was “not so extensive that we could disqualify the result.” “The election naturally delivered results, and now many people are satisfied, so our approach to Armenia should be objective and balanced,” he said.
The remarks drew criticism from some of the parliamentarians attending the debate, notably Hungary's Matyas Eorsi who has monitored Armenian polls in the past. "On the one hand, there are demonstrators who want to achieve certain political goals and, on the other hand, there is a state that wants to suppress the demonstrators," he said. "We do not need to be balanced about that."
"It is difficult for us to make decisions if the factual evidence is not presented to us objectively,” complained Malcolm Bruce, a British lawmaker.
Eorsi drew parallels between the Armenian crisis and the situation in Georgia during the November “rose revolution,” saying that Yerevan should “learn” from deposed President Eduard Shevardnadze’s decision not to use force against protesters. “This should stop now,” he continued. “If it does not, we will have to make a decision about whether such a country is suitable to be a member of the Council of Europe.”
Eorsi was instrumental in the PACE’s decision to change a paragraph which said the Armenian opposition “should refrain from attempts to use street demonstrations to reverse the results of last year’s elections.” Its revised version only urges the opposition to “strive to achieve its goals within the constitutional framework.”
The Armenian members of the PACE representing Kocharian’s governing coalition tried unsuccessfully to block the change. But they did succeed in keeping a passage that the 2003 vote irregularities “did not decisively change the outcome of the elections nor invalidate their final results” in the adopted text.
The assembly also rejected a proposal to endorse the idea of the national vote of confidence in Kocharian floated by Armenia’s Constitutional Court last year. But it at the same time did not state explicitly that such a referendum must not be held.
“The Assembly calls upon the authorities and the opposition to refrain from any action which may lead to further violence and to engage in a dialogue without preconditions,” the resolution reads. Still, it admits that “there seems to be little room for dialogue between the authorities and the opposition” at present.
The PACE calls seem to have satisfied both the opposition and the three pro-presidential parties making up Armenia’s coalition government.
“That is certainly in tune with the opposition demands,” Stepan Demirchian, the leader of the Artarutyun alliance, told reporters. “They are not subject to negotiation, they are simply constitutional norms that must be respected.”
“If it weren’t for the international community, I think the regime’s efforts to cling to power would be much more brutal in Armenia,” said Vazgen Manukian, another leading member of the block.
But Galust Sahakian, the parliamentary leader of Prime Minister Andranik Markarian’s Republican Party, downplayed the significance of the PACE criticism. “In essence, nothing new was added to the proposals made by the PACE in January,” he said.
“We expected such a reaction. We also see our approaches reflected in those provisions,” said Hrair Karapetian of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, another governing party.
Both Sahakian and Karapetian urged the opposition leaders to resume their talks with the ruling coalition which broke down on Tuesday. But Demirchian brushed aside the calls.
“As long as we don’t see certain practical steps, it will be unserious and pointless to talk about a dialogue,” he said, adding that the opposition will continue to fight for regime change “in a peaceful way.”
#106
ARR
-
- Members
-
- 82 posts
Member
- Location:Armenia
Posted 07 May 2004 - 09:08 AM
Here is what the man had to say.
Council Of Europe ‘Not A Politburo For Armenia,’ Kocharian Says
By Ruzanna Stepanian
President Robert Kocharian on Thursday took issue with and downplayed the criticism of his government’s response to recent opposition rallies made by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) last week.
Kocharian said that while he finds “normal” the recommendations contained in the PACE resolution, he disagrees with its assessment of the Armenian authorities’ response to the campaign of street protests launched by the opposition one month ago.
“We are looking into [the document]. I see no particularly big problems in its content,” he told journalists on the sidelines of a business exhibition in Yerevan. “But there are quite serious inaccuracies in the description and chronology of events.
“We will prepare our reply to this description in a few days’ time, and will submit our written opinion on that document in June.”
The PACE strongly criticized the crackdown on the opposition, saying that it contradicts “the letter and the spirit” of its earlier recommendations to the Armenian authorities. Its resolution called on the authorities to scrap “unjustified restrictions” on peaceful demonstrations, release opposition detainees and investigate the “human rights abuses” reported over the past month. The resolution warned that Yerevan will face sanctions if it fails to address these demands by next September.
The Strasbourg-based assembly, whose decisions are important but not binding for the Council of Europe leadership, at the same time refused to back the opposition leaders’ demands for a referendum of confidence in Kocharian whose 2003 reelection they refuse to recognize. It said reported fraud and irregularities “did not decisively change the outcome of the elections nor invalidate their final results.”
Kocharian indicated that the Council of Europe can not force his administration to comply with all of its demands because it does not have as much authority over Armenia as the Soviet Union’s governing Communist Party Politburo had before the Soviet collapse. “You must not regard the Council of Europe as the former Politburo where they made and imposed decisions,” he said. “It’s an organization of which we are also a member. We have a right to vote and express our opinion there.”
Asked whether the Armenian authorities will accept the PACE demand for an immediate end to the controversial “administrative arrests” of participants of opposition rallies, he replied: “I’m not going to discuss every line [in the resolution] here. Let’s just be more serious on this issue.”
source: RFE/RL
Council Of Europe ‘Not A Politburo For Armenia,’ Kocharian Says
By Ruzanna Stepanian
President Robert Kocharian on Thursday took issue with and downplayed the criticism of his government’s response to recent opposition rallies made by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) last week.
Kocharian said that while he finds “normal” the recommendations contained in the PACE resolution, he disagrees with its assessment of the Armenian authorities’ response to the campaign of street protests launched by the opposition one month ago.
“We are looking into [the document]. I see no particularly big problems in its content,” he told journalists on the sidelines of a business exhibition in Yerevan. “But there are quite serious inaccuracies in the description and chronology of events.
“We will prepare our reply to this description in a few days’ time, and will submit our written opinion on that document in June.”
The PACE strongly criticized the crackdown on the opposition, saying that it contradicts “the letter and the spirit” of its earlier recommendations to the Armenian authorities. Its resolution called on the authorities to scrap “unjustified restrictions” on peaceful demonstrations, release opposition detainees and investigate the “human rights abuses” reported over the past month. The resolution warned that Yerevan will face sanctions if it fails to address these demands by next September.
The Strasbourg-based assembly, whose decisions are important but not binding for the Council of Europe leadership, at the same time refused to back the opposition leaders’ demands for a referendum of confidence in Kocharian whose 2003 reelection they refuse to recognize. It said reported fraud and irregularities “did not decisively change the outcome of the elections nor invalidate their final results.”
Kocharian indicated that the Council of Europe can not force his administration to comply with all of its demands because it does not have as much authority over Armenia as the Soviet Union’s governing Communist Party Politburo had before the Soviet collapse. “You must not regard the Council of Europe as the former Politburo where they made and imposed decisions,” he said. “It’s an organization of which we are also a member. We have a right to vote and express our opinion there.”
Asked whether the Armenian authorities will accept the PACE demand for an immediate end to the controversial “administrative arrests” of participants of opposition rallies, he replied: “I’m not going to discuss every line [in the resolution] here. Let’s just be more serious on this issue.”
source: RFE/RL
#107
KnightOfArmenia
-
- Members
-
- 198 posts
Member
Posted 03 June 2004 - 08:25 PM
sigh My views on the Armenian democracy are not the highest. Honestly, if I had my way, the system for Armenia would be radically different; then again, the entire system I've come up with is designed with Greater Armenia in mind, rather than the rump state we have now.
#108
ARR
-
- Members
-
- 82 posts
Member
- Location:Armenia
Posted 09 June 2004 - 07:35 PM
The loosers are in crisis
“Hayots Ashkhar” says that the Armenian opposition seems to be “revising its tactics” after the failure of its spring campaign for President Robert Kocharian’s resignation. The paper says the Artarutyun bloc and the National Unity Party are now desperate to maintain political tension that reached its climax in April and to benefit from “some foreign policy movements.” “But the new foreign policy challenges, the likelihood of which is really great, will serve as a gauntlet thrown at not only the authorities but also the entire country, including the opposition.” The latter should therefore stop using the issue to “blackmail” the government.
If the opposition wants to be respected and reckoned with by the government, “Hayots Ashkhar” continues, it must abandon “the tactics of taking advantage of external difficulties awaiting the country.” “As long as the opposition pins its hopes on the discussion of the fulfillment of Armenia’s obligations at the Council of Europe, continues to bombard the world’s mighty forces with petitions, but refuses to open the door of its own National Assembly, it will itself stand in the way of likely domestic political dialogue,” the paper concludes.
Gurgen Arsenian, the leader of the pro-establishment United Labor Party (MAK) represented in parliament, claims that the recent opposition actions were engineered by unspecified “Moscow commercial structures.” “I am talking about those structures that don’t represent the Russian government and act within the framework of Armenian interests,” Arsenian tells “Aravot.” “Those Moscow structures have a certain volume of business which tempts them to have also state power in Armenia.” Arsenian speculates those “structures” are bent on weakening the Armenian side’s bargaining position in the Nagorno-Artsax peace talks. As for the Russian government, its position on Artsax will not necessarily be pro-Armenian, he adds.
Vazgen Manukian, a veteran opposition politician, tells “Aravot” that “a certain stage of the opposition’s struggle has come to its end” and that it is now “time for dialogue.” “Before the next Council of Europe resolution the authorities will make some efforts regarding the release of political prisoners, which will create a psychological possibility of talks,” Manukian says. “Both sides must understand that they are up against a wall and that they can break it only by talking [to each other].”
Writing in “Azg,” a prominent Armenian philologist, Avik Isahakian, makes the point that the Yerevan municipality has done more to whip up anti-government sentiment in the country than the opposition leaders. Isahakian compares the shrinkage of the city’s public parks sanctioned by the municipal authorities to “enemy occupation.” “The once thriving parks are being divided piece by piece among a group of [business] predators,” Isahakian says bitterly. Armenians can not fail to dislike their government after seeing all of this, he says.
RFE/RL
“Hayots Ashkhar” says that the Armenian opposition seems to be “revising its tactics” after the failure of its spring campaign for President Robert Kocharian’s resignation. The paper says the Artarutyun bloc and the National Unity Party are now desperate to maintain political tension that reached its climax in April and to benefit from “some foreign policy movements.” “But the new foreign policy challenges, the likelihood of which is really great, will serve as a gauntlet thrown at not only the authorities but also the entire country, including the opposition.” The latter should therefore stop using the issue to “blackmail” the government.
If the opposition wants to be respected and reckoned with by the government, “Hayots Ashkhar” continues, it must abandon “the tactics of taking advantage of external difficulties awaiting the country.” “As long as the opposition pins its hopes on the discussion of the fulfillment of Armenia’s obligations at the Council of Europe, continues to bombard the world’s mighty forces with petitions, but refuses to open the door of its own National Assembly, it will itself stand in the way of likely domestic political dialogue,” the paper concludes.
Gurgen Arsenian, the leader of the pro-establishment United Labor Party (MAK) represented in parliament, claims that the recent opposition actions were engineered by unspecified “Moscow commercial structures.” “I am talking about those structures that don’t represent the Russian government and act within the framework of Armenian interests,” Arsenian tells “Aravot.” “Those Moscow structures have a certain volume of business which tempts them to have also state power in Armenia.” Arsenian speculates those “structures” are bent on weakening the Armenian side’s bargaining position in the Nagorno-Artsax peace talks. As for the Russian government, its position on Artsax will not necessarily be pro-Armenian, he adds.
Vazgen Manukian, a veteran opposition politician, tells “Aravot” that “a certain stage of the opposition’s struggle has come to its end” and that it is now “time for dialogue.” “Before the next Council of Europe resolution the authorities will make some efforts regarding the release of political prisoners, which will create a psychological possibility of talks,” Manukian says. “Both sides must understand that they are up against a wall and that they can break it only by talking [to each other].”
Writing in “Azg,” a prominent Armenian philologist, Avik Isahakian, makes the point that the Yerevan municipality has done more to whip up anti-government sentiment in the country than the opposition leaders. Isahakian compares the shrinkage of the city’s public parks sanctioned by the municipal authorities to “enemy occupation.” “The once thriving parks are being divided piece by piece among a group of [business] predators,” Isahakian says bitterly. Armenians can not fail to dislike their government after seeing all of this, he says.
RFE/RL
#109
ARR
-
- Members
-
- 82 posts
Member
- Location:Armenia
Posted 25 June 2004 - 12:08 PM
Address by Robert Kocharian, President of Armenia
Strasbourg, 23 June 2004
Mr. President, Members of the Parliamentary Assembly, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is an honor and pleasure to address you. Last time I have addressed the Assembly on a very significant day for Armenia the day of accession to the Council of Europe.
These were three demanding years of reforms that have touched upon all the domains of life in our country and necessitated full time employment of all our efforts. Today I am here to announce that Armenia has fulfilled the vast majority of its accession commitments. For the few outstanding ones, there is a timetable agreed with a deadline fixed at the end of this year. Still, if asked of the single most vital achievement I would definitely answer: change in the perceptions in the Armenian society about own future. The people of Armenia is now more involved in the everyday life of the country. Formation of the Civil Society is on the move.
Does this mean Armenia has achieved the desirable level of democratic freedoms? The obvious answer is NO. Democracy has a long way to go in any country with high poverty indicators. To assure fully inclusive participation by the people in the democratic process, it is essential to achieve at least minimal level of social guarantees. That is precisely why we have strived to synchronize reforms in economy, political system, judiciary and the social field. In essence, Armenia has completed the process of dismantling the former centralized system of power and economy, which allowed for a total control over the society.
Armenian economy has undergone radical transformation both in terms of activity fields and of property forms. The scope and depth of the reforms allowed for a full scale enactment of market economy. At present over 85% of Armenia's GDP is produced in private sector, over 38% of it in small and medium enterprises. Annual GDP growth has averaged at I2% for last three consecutive years, regardless of the blockade implemented by two fellow members of this very organization.
That dynamic economic growth has allowed us to develop a long term Poverty Elimination Strategy. The first time in Armenia this governmental program was developed in close cooperation with international financial institutions and also with wide involvement of the society. That Strategy now guides us in the political decision making and in choosing our budget priorities.
Fighting corruption is Yet another important step towards effective democracy. The Government of Armenia watches corruption as a systemic evil, which cannot be eradicated merely through rhetoric or a couple of sampler prosecutions. We concentrate on the systemic change aimed at ruling out the sources of corruption. That is exactly why we have joined the GRECO group where we can learn from the experience of other states on combating corruption. Through a wide discussion including the OSCE, we have developed a comprehensive Anti corruption strategy. A few weeks ago I have established an AntiCorruption Council.
As an urgent measure directed at eradication of corruption in Armenia I shall prioritize the necessity of deepening the judicial reforms, improvement in tax and customs administration, and formation of an effective system of Civil Service. All these are key tools for implementation of anti corruption policies.
In terms of a broader effort aimed at reducing corruption risks, I would like to particularly mention the importance of establishing competitive climate, predictability of governmental action, simplification of procedures, transparency thereof and public control. Those are our current priorities aimed at achieving the sustainability of the reforms and irreversibility of the democratization process in Armenia.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I know many of you wonder: what was happening in Armenia last spring? What fostered the activity of the opposition that surrogated the parliamentary work by revolutionary rallies? You are right to wonder, since you have been all informed by the monitoring group Rapporteurs who had visited Armenia only very recently, in January, that there are significant advancements in fulfilling the commitments accepted at the accession. And you know that most of those deal with advancing democracy. Expert evaluations of Armenia by international financial institutes are more than optimistic. Two digit figures of economic growth and budgetary proficit, by default cannot fuel the revolutionary atmosphere. Moreover, there are three full years before the next parliamentary elections. Therefore, there were no internal prerequisites for increase in political activity. Accordingly, what has happened?
The answer is easy. The opposition, encouraged by the results of the "rose revolution" in neighboring Georgia, decided to duplicate it in the Armenian reality, which, however, had nothing in common with the Georgian one. They disregarded the fact that Armenia's economy, as opposite to Georgian, undergoes dynamic advancement, the government is efficient, and the democratic achievements are safeguarded by institutional structures, including the law enforcement system capable of protecting the public order.
The history has many times demonstrated that inspiration by foreign revolutions never results in positive outcomes. Unfortunately, learning often comes only from own experience. That also happened in our case. The opposition left the parliament and unfolded street activity. They openly declared the goal: to destabilize the situation in the country, cumulate the maximum possible number of participants in a street action, surround the building of the Presidency and force me to resign.
Once the opposition witnessed lack of public interest towards their action plan, they decided to increase the tension, most probably to attract attention. They blocked the most loaded avenue of the city of Yerevan. That resulted in disruption of the traffic, prevented normal functioning of the National Assembly, of the Administration of the President and of the Constitutional Court. Four embassies, the National Academy of Science and one of the biggest schools are located at the same avenue. The organizers called on the public for demonstrative disobedience. The police was left with no choice; the public order was restored quickly, without any significant damage to the health of the participants.
Necessity of implementation of similar police operations is always regrettable. Still, authorities have to protect the society from political extremists. It is particularly important in young democracies, which still lack the advanced traditions of the political and legal culture. Even more so when part of the population lives in poverty and can be easily manipulated by populist rhetoric.
I would like to particularly mention that the parties comprising the ruling coalition have many times offered cooperation to the opposition. Unfortunately, those offers were rejected. The opposition probably thinks that cooperation would undermine the revolutionary temper of their supporters.
Our country is in the important stage of its advancement, and I am confident that there are many directions that require non partisan effort. We have offered the opposition to work together on the most important issues the Constitutional reform and the new Electoral Code. The offer is still valid, however the discussions shall be held in the parliament, not in the street.
Ladies and gentlemen:
I would now like to turn to another important issue: the honoring of obligations by the new members of the Council of Europe. May I remind you that most of the reforms to be implemented by a new member are sensitive issues in domestic politics? Often, implementation of the reforms clashes the inertia of the public opinion. In the case of Armenia examples of such issues are the Constitutional reform, abolition of the death penalty and the new Electoral legislation.
Active implementation of commitments by the authorities usually results in increased internal tension and meets active resistance of the opposition. For example, the parliamentary opposition of Armenia openly contested the abolition of the death penalty and the new edition of the Constitution, drafted in close cooperation with the Venice Commission.
Honoring the obligations is a heavy political load accepted by the entire country, not only by the authorities. Our application for accession to the Council of Europe was signed by all the parliamentary factions. In this Assembly the country is presented by the entire parliamentary spectrum. Therefore, the duty of honoring the obligations shall bind the opposition as much as the government. One ought not purposefully fail to comply with own obligations for the sole purpose of discrediting the ruling political authorities in face of the Council of Europe.
I would never talk about all this if "not the recent resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly on Armenia. I regret that some of our MPs drew the PACE into that discussion. I am confident that the Council of Europe is not the best choice for the place to practice the opposition authority contention. For that purpose there is national parliament: the main political mise en scene of Armenia.
Mr. Chairman:
I would now like to turn to one of the priority interest issues for Armenia. At the time of accession Armenia undertook to make steps towards peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict. We have done so because we highly appreciate the necessity of friendly relations among neighboring states. However, to be able to effectively secure a long lasting solution, one needs to deeply understand the essence of the conflict. I would like to outline two important factors characteristic of the Karabagh conflict.
First of all: Karabagh has never been part of independent Azerbaijan. At the time of collapse of the Soviet Union two states were formed: the Azerbaijani Republic on the territory of Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic and Republic of Nagorno Karabagh on the territory of the Nagorno Karabagh Autonomous Region. Establishment of both these states has similar legal grounds. The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, henceforth, has nothing to do with the Republic of Nagorno Karabagh. We are ready to discuss the issue of settling that conflict in the legal domain.
Second: the war of I992 94 was launched by the aggression of the Azeri authorities, which attempted to implement ethnic cleansing of the territory of Nagorno Karabagh with the purpose of its annexation. The situation in place today is the result of a selfless fight of the Armenians of Nagorno Karabagh for survival on their own land. It is a classical example of both the implementation of the right for self determination and of misusing the "territorial integrity" concept as a justification for ethnic cleansings.
The people of Karabagh has prevailed in it's strive for independent life in an egalitarian society. Independence of Karabagh today has I6 years of history. An entire generation grew up there that can think of no other status for the country. Nagorno Karabagh Republic today is an established state, in essence meeting all of the Council of Europe's membership criteria. It is the reality which cannot be ignored. That is exactly why we insist on direct participation of Nagorrio Karabagh in the negotiations, in which Armenia actively participates.
The solution shall emerge from the substance of the conflict and not from the perception of the possible strengthening of Azerbaijan through future "oil money". "Oil money" approach is the formula of confrontation and not of compromise. Armenia is ready to continue and advance the cease fire regime. We are ready for serious negotiations on a full scale solution for the conflict. That is exactly why we have accepted two last formulas of solution offered by the international mediators, which, unfortunately, were denied by Azerbaijan.
It is difficult to overstate the importance of advancement of the regional cooperation in the Southern Caucasus. There is a wide spectrum for potential cooperation: from synchronization of legislation to restoring the interconnected transportation systems and to joint projects in the energy sector. We are confident that regional cooperation is the right route to the settlement of conflicts.
We have no doubt that South Caucasus as a region of inclusive economic cooperation will be able to achieve much more than three states of the region can dream of doing on their own. We believe in peace and cooperation.
Southern Caucasus has always been sensitive of external influences. Located at the crossroads of civilizations with vast potential in resources and numerous transit roots, it has always been a zone of increased interest. These considerations guided us in forming our foreign policy of "complimentarity." That policy is based on the concept of seeking advantages in softening the contradictions of the global and regional powers, and not in deepening the gaps. We are responsible for the regional stability and our actions shall help to solve problems, instead of creating new ones. That approach allowed us to develop trustworthy relations with the United States, the European Union and Iran, and to strengthen the traditional kinship with Russia.
In this context I would also like to concentrate on the Armenian Turkish relations, or rather on their absence. Those relations are shaded by the memories of the past: the Genocide, its consequences and lack of repentance. Nowadays the situation is worsened by the blockade of Armenia by Turkey. I would like to outline two principals which in my view are crucial to finding the way out from this impasse.
First of all: Developing practical ties and deliberations over the inherited problems shall take place in different dimensions and shall not influence one the other.
Second: Armenian Turkish relations shall not be conditioned by our relations with a third country (Azerbaijan). Any precondition terminates all positive expectations.
Dear Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen:
Concluding, I would like to assure you that Armenia perceives its future in full scale integration with the European family. A few days ago the European Union has decided to include Armenia in its "new neighborhood" initiative. This will further advance our resolve to satisfy the European criteria, to be able to contribute and fully benefit from the cooperation between our states and nations. We walk this road with deep belief and confidence and we appreciate your efforts to help us in that uneasy but crucial effort.
Thank you for your attention.
http://www.coe.int/T...3_kocharian.asp
Strasbourg, 23 June 2004
Mr. President, Members of the Parliamentary Assembly, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is an honor and pleasure to address you. Last time I have addressed the Assembly on a very significant day for Armenia the day of accession to the Council of Europe.
These were three demanding years of reforms that have touched upon all the domains of life in our country and necessitated full time employment of all our efforts. Today I am here to announce that Armenia has fulfilled the vast majority of its accession commitments. For the few outstanding ones, there is a timetable agreed with a deadline fixed at the end of this year. Still, if asked of the single most vital achievement I would definitely answer: change in the perceptions in the Armenian society about own future. The people of Armenia is now more involved in the everyday life of the country. Formation of the Civil Society is on the move.
Does this mean Armenia has achieved the desirable level of democratic freedoms? The obvious answer is NO. Democracy has a long way to go in any country with high poverty indicators. To assure fully inclusive participation by the people in the democratic process, it is essential to achieve at least minimal level of social guarantees. That is precisely why we have strived to synchronize reforms in economy, political system, judiciary and the social field. In essence, Armenia has completed the process of dismantling the former centralized system of power and economy, which allowed for a total control over the society.
Armenian economy has undergone radical transformation both in terms of activity fields and of property forms. The scope and depth of the reforms allowed for a full scale enactment of market economy. At present over 85% of Armenia's GDP is produced in private sector, over 38% of it in small and medium enterprises. Annual GDP growth has averaged at I2% for last three consecutive years, regardless of the blockade implemented by two fellow members of this very organization.
That dynamic economic growth has allowed us to develop a long term Poverty Elimination Strategy. The first time in Armenia this governmental program was developed in close cooperation with international financial institutions and also with wide involvement of the society. That Strategy now guides us in the political decision making and in choosing our budget priorities.
Fighting corruption is Yet another important step towards effective democracy. The Government of Armenia watches corruption as a systemic evil, which cannot be eradicated merely through rhetoric or a couple of sampler prosecutions. We concentrate on the systemic change aimed at ruling out the sources of corruption. That is exactly why we have joined the GRECO group where we can learn from the experience of other states on combating corruption. Through a wide discussion including the OSCE, we have developed a comprehensive Anti corruption strategy. A few weeks ago I have established an AntiCorruption Council.
As an urgent measure directed at eradication of corruption in Armenia I shall prioritize the necessity of deepening the judicial reforms, improvement in tax and customs administration, and formation of an effective system of Civil Service. All these are key tools for implementation of anti corruption policies.
In terms of a broader effort aimed at reducing corruption risks, I would like to particularly mention the importance of establishing competitive climate, predictability of governmental action, simplification of procedures, transparency thereof and public control. Those are our current priorities aimed at achieving the sustainability of the reforms and irreversibility of the democratization process in Armenia.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I know many of you wonder: what was happening in Armenia last spring? What fostered the activity of the opposition that surrogated the parliamentary work by revolutionary rallies? You are right to wonder, since you have been all informed by the monitoring group Rapporteurs who had visited Armenia only very recently, in January, that there are significant advancements in fulfilling the commitments accepted at the accession. And you know that most of those deal with advancing democracy. Expert evaluations of Armenia by international financial institutes are more than optimistic. Two digit figures of economic growth and budgetary proficit, by default cannot fuel the revolutionary atmosphere. Moreover, there are three full years before the next parliamentary elections. Therefore, there were no internal prerequisites for increase in political activity. Accordingly, what has happened?
The answer is easy. The opposition, encouraged by the results of the "rose revolution" in neighboring Georgia, decided to duplicate it in the Armenian reality, which, however, had nothing in common with the Georgian one. They disregarded the fact that Armenia's economy, as opposite to Georgian, undergoes dynamic advancement, the government is efficient, and the democratic achievements are safeguarded by institutional structures, including the law enforcement system capable of protecting the public order.
The history has many times demonstrated that inspiration by foreign revolutions never results in positive outcomes. Unfortunately, learning often comes only from own experience. That also happened in our case. The opposition left the parliament and unfolded street activity. They openly declared the goal: to destabilize the situation in the country, cumulate the maximum possible number of participants in a street action, surround the building of the Presidency and force me to resign.
Once the opposition witnessed lack of public interest towards their action plan, they decided to increase the tension, most probably to attract attention. They blocked the most loaded avenue of the city of Yerevan. That resulted in disruption of the traffic, prevented normal functioning of the National Assembly, of the Administration of the President and of the Constitutional Court. Four embassies, the National Academy of Science and one of the biggest schools are located at the same avenue. The organizers called on the public for demonstrative disobedience. The police was left with no choice; the public order was restored quickly, without any significant damage to the health of the participants.
Necessity of implementation of similar police operations is always regrettable. Still, authorities have to protect the society from political extremists. It is particularly important in young democracies, which still lack the advanced traditions of the political and legal culture. Even more so when part of the population lives in poverty and can be easily manipulated by populist rhetoric.
I would like to particularly mention that the parties comprising the ruling coalition have many times offered cooperation to the opposition. Unfortunately, those offers were rejected. The opposition probably thinks that cooperation would undermine the revolutionary temper of their supporters.
Our country is in the important stage of its advancement, and I am confident that there are many directions that require non partisan effort. We have offered the opposition to work together on the most important issues the Constitutional reform and the new Electoral Code. The offer is still valid, however the discussions shall be held in the parliament, not in the street.
Ladies and gentlemen:
I would now like to turn to another important issue: the honoring of obligations by the new members of the Council of Europe. May I remind you that most of the reforms to be implemented by a new member are sensitive issues in domestic politics? Often, implementation of the reforms clashes the inertia of the public opinion. In the case of Armenia examples of such issues are the Constitutional reform, abolition of the death penalty and the new Electoral legislation.
Active implementation of commitments by the authorities usually results in increased internal tension and meets active resistance of the opposition. For example, the parliamentary opposition of Armenia openly contested the abolition of the death penalty and the new edition of the Constitution, drafted in close cooperation with the Venice Commission.
Honoring the obligations is a heavy political load accepted by the entire country, not only by the authorities. Our application for accession to the Council of Europe was signed by all the parliamentary factions. In this Assembly the country is presented by the entire parliamentary spectrum. Therefore, the duty of honoring the obligations shall bind the opposition as much as the government. One ought not purposefully fail to comply with own obligations for the sole purpose of discrediting the ruling political authorities in face of the Council of Europe.
I would never talk about all this if "not the recent resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly on Armenia. I regret that some of our MPs drew the PACE into that discussion. I am confident that the Council of Europe is not the best choice for the place to practice the opposition authority contention. For that purpose there is national parliament: the main political mise en scene of Armenia.
Mr. Chairman:
I would now like to turn to one of the priority interest issues for Armenia. At the time of accession Armenia undertook to make steps towards peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict. We have done so because we highly appreciate the necessity of friendly relations among neighboring states. However, to be able to effectively secure a long lasting solution, one needs to deeply understand the essence of the conflict. I would like to outline two important factors characteristic of the Karabagh conflict.
First of all: Karabagh has never been part of independent Azerbaijan. At the time of collapse of the Soviet Union two states were formed: the Azerbaijani Republic on the territory of Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic and Republic of Nagorno Karabagh on the territory of the Nagorno Karabagh Autonomous Region. Establishment of both these states has similar legal grounds. The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, henceforth, has nothing to do with the Republic of Nagorno Karabagh. We are ready to discuss the issue of settling that conflict in the legal domain.
Second: the war of I992 94 was launched by the aggression of the Azeri authorities, which attempted to implement ethnic cleansing of the territory of Nagorno Karabagh with the purpose of its annexation. The situation in place today is the result of a selfless fight of the Armenians of Nagorno Karabagh for survival on their own land. It is a classical example of both the implementation of the right for self determination and of misusing the "territorial integrity" concept as a justification for ethnic cleansings.
The people of Karabagh has prevailed in it's strive for independent life in an egalitarian society. Independence of Karabagh today has I6 years of history. An entire generation grew up there that can think of no other status for the country. Nagorno Karabagh Republic today is an established state, in essence meeting all of the Council of Europe's membership criteria. It is the reality which cannot be ignored. That is exactly why we insist on direct participation of Nagorrio Karabagh in the negotiations, in which Armenia actively participates.
The solution shall emerge from the substance of the conflict and not from the perception of the possible strengthening of Azerbaijan through future "oil money". "Oil money" approach is the formula of confrontation and not of compromise. Armenia is ready to continue and advance the cease fire regime. We are ready for serious negotiations on a full scale solution for the conflict. That is exactly why we have accepted two last formulas of solution offered by the international mediators, which, unfortunately, were denied by Azerbaijan.
It is difficult to overstate the importance of advancement of the regional cooperation in the Southern Caucasus. There is a wide spectrum for potential cooperation: from synchronization of legislation to restoring the interconnected transportation systems and to joint projects in the energy sector. We are confident that regional cooperation is the right route to the settlement of conflicts.
We have no doubt that South Caucasus as a region of inclusive economic cooperation will be able to achieve much more than three states of the region can dream of doing on their own. We believe in peace and cooperation.
Southern Caucasus has always been sensitive of external influences. Located at the crossroads of civilizations with vast potential in resources and numerous transit roots, it has always been a zone of increased interest. These considerations guided us in forming our foreign policy of "complimentarity." That policy is based on the concept of seeking advantages in softening the contradictions of the global and regional powers, and not in deepening the gaps. We are responsible for the regional stability and our actions shall help to solve problems, instead of creating new ones. That approach allowed us to develop trustworthy relations with the United States, the European Union and Iran, and to strengthen the traditional kinship with Russia.
In this context I would also like to concentrate on the Armenian Turkish relations, or rather on their absence. Those relations are shaded by the memories of the past: the Genocide, its consequences and lack of repentance. Nowadays the situation is worsened by the blockade of Armenia by Turkey. I would like to outline two principals which in my view are crucial to finding the way out from this impasse.
First of all: Developing practical ties and deliberations over the inherited problems shall take place in different dimensions and shall not influence one the other.
Second: Armenian Turkish relations shall not be conditioned by our relations with a third country (Azerbaijan). Any precondition terminates all positive expectations.
Dear Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen:
Concluding, I would like to assure you that Armenia perceives its future in full scale integration with the European family. A few days ago the European Union has decided to include Armenia in its "new neighborhood" initiative. This will further advance our resolve to satisfy the European criteria, to be able to contribute and fully benefit from the cooperation between our states and nations. We walk this road with deep belief and confidence and we appreciate your efforts to help us in that uneasy but crucial effort.
Thank you for your attention.
http://www.coe.int/T...3_kocharian.asp
#110
THOTH
-
- Banned
-
- 3,610 posts
Veteran
- Location:USA
- Interests:many
Posted 25 June 2004 - 12:25 PM
Awesome speech - really, simply superb!
Just a note however - MJ had previously posted this in the thread about Armenia and OCSE....
Just a note however - MJ had previously posted this in the thread about Armenia and OCSE....
#111
bellthecat
-
- Banned
-
- 1,643 posts
A poor kitty, lost in the rain.
- Location:far, far away
- Interests:mreowing purring snuggling sleeping
Posted 25 June 2004 - 01:48 PM
QUOTE (THOTH @ Jun 25 2004, 06:25 PM)
Awesome speech - really, simply superb!
Crap as usual from Thoth.
Kocharian's words are just the words of a has-been with no credibility left at home or abroad, reduced to playing the nationalism card for a domestic audience. That's the final card that all dictators play at the point when they find themselves in a similar position of extreme political weakness.
His flag waving might put a temporary halt to his slipping fortunes, but, like a dud battery, no amount of recharging will bring them back to permanant life. If he really wanted to secure the future of Karabagh then the best thing he could do would be to resign tomorrow and take his cronies with him, since only democracy can ensure Karabagh's - and Armenia's - survival.
Steve
#112
THOTH
-
- Banned
-
- 3,610 posts
Veteran
- Location:USA
- Interests:many
Posted 25 June 2004 - 02:33 PM
...it was a great speech regardless...regardless of Kocharian's many faults and failures...
#113
Armen
-
- Members
-
- 3,456 posts
Veterinarian
- Gender:Male
- Location:Yerevan
Posted 11 September 2004 - 08:08 PM
From Iravinq Weekly:
A revlutionary situation as described by Lenin: "When the 'lower classes' do not want to live in the old way and the 'upper classes' cannot carry on in the old way".
A revolutionary situation with Armenian characteristics: "The authorities doesn't want a change, the opposition cannot make a change and the people get a good beating".
A revlutionary situation as described by Lenin: "When the 'lower classes' do not want to live in the old way and the 'upper classes' cannot carry on in the old way".
A revolutionary situation with Armenian characteristics: "The authorities doesn't want a change, the opposition cannot make a change and the people get a good beating".
#114
Armen
-
- Members
-
- 3,456 posts
Veterinarian
- Gender:Male
- Location:Yerevan
Posted 18 October 2004 - 08:15 PM
INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP - NEW REPORT
http://www.icg.org/home/index.cfm
Armenia: Internal Instability Ahead
Armenia's stability is fragile. Its departure from democratic standards generates domestic unrest, and war with Azerbaijan could easily reignite. Corruption and rule of law violations have disillusioned the population, half of which lives below the poverty line, gradually creating a volatile mix. Ten years after the ceasefire in the militarily successful but economically and politically disastrous war over Nagorno-Artsax, Armenia is not really at peace: the negotiation process is stalled, and there are no mechanisms on the ground to prevent renewed conflict. Armenia enjoys substantial macroeconomic growth but difficult relations with its immediate neighbours have locked it out of all major regional trade deals and east-west pipeline projects, threatening future growth. To protect stability, Armenia needs real peace, a robust approach to democratisation and strengthened rule of law.
http://www.icg.org/home/index.cfm
Armenia: Internal Instability Ahead
Armenia's stability is fragile. Its departure from democratic standards generates domestic unrest, and war with Azerbaijan could easily reignite. Corruption and rule of law violations have disillusioned the population, half of which lives below the poverty line, gradually creating a volatile mix. Ten years after the ceasefire in the militarily successful but economically and politically disastrous war over Nagorno-Artsax, Armenia is not really at peace: the negotiation process is stalled, and there are no mechanisms on the ground to prevent renewed conflict. Armenia enjoys substantial macroeconomic growth but difficult relations with its immediate neighbours have locked it out of all major regional trade deals and east-west pipeline projects, threatening future growth. To protect stability, Armenia needs real peace, a robust approach to democratisation and strengthened rule of law.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
