grig75

The corruption was always a part of that society. Even in old "good" times only people with the connections snd money got to the prestigious medical school, university (some faculties), polytechnic institute (also some faculties). So it is not something new. The sad thing about this that it is spreading, as oppose to become less acceptable. But, I thing it has a lot to do with the economical situation in the country (i am talking about present times), and inability of most educated people to support their families, relatives etc. They don't have too many choices: take money, leave the country. Those who don't have enough money or support to leave the country, they will taka the money. It is very difficult to blame that kind people.

I am attaching a short CV of Armen Aivazian, PhD Armen M. Aivazian was born in Yerevan, Armenia, in 1964. In 1992 he received his Kandidat of the Historical Sciences (equivalent to Ph.D.) degree from the Institute of History of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. From 1992 to 1994 he worked as Assistant to the President of Armenia, Adviser to the Foreign Minister of Armenia, and Acting Head of the Armenian Delegation to the Conference (now Organization) on Security and Cooperation in Europe at Vienna. From 1994 to 2002 he was a Senior Researcher in the Matenadaran (the Yerevan Institute of Medieval Manuscripts) and an Adjunct Senior Lecturer of Political Science and a Fellow of the Center for Policy Analysis at the American University of Armenia. From October 1995 to January 1996, as a recipient of an International Security Studies grant provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, he worked in affiliation with the Program on the Analysis and Resolution of Conflicts, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University. In the 1997-1998 academic year, he was a Visiting Senior Fulbright Scholar, affiliated with the Center for Russian and East European Studies, Stanford University, USA. From October 2000 to April 2001 he was a Visiting Alexander S. Onassis Foundation Fellow at Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP). Below are the monographs published by A. Aivazian: The Mother See of St. Etchmiadsin and the Armenian Church in the 15-18th centuries (Historical Studies) (Yerevan: The Modern Center of Armenological Studies, 2002). Forthcoming. Mother Tongue and The Origins of Nationalism: A Comparative Study of the Armenian and European Primary Sources (Yerevan, Matenadaran: "Artagers," 2001) The Code of Honor of the Armenian Military, 4-5th centuries (2000, in Armenian) The History of Armenia as Presented in American Historiography: A Critical Survey (1998, in Armenian) The Settlement of the Nagorno-Artsax Conflict and the Strategic Security of Armenia (1998, in Armenian) The Armenian Rebellion of the 1720s and the Threat of Genocidal Reprisal (1997, in English)

Idealistically, yes. That where they have to go. But they don't. Have you seen roads in Armenia? How many houses (knowing to you) were build for people in need? People in Leninakan still live in the trailers. Help- or volunteeer organizations? I am not sure about that either.

I thing the construction of North Avenue is not a bad idea, but it was planned vry poorly. Let me guess, by Armenian narrow minded goverment. They thought they will be able to shut people mouths with a little bit money, which you can't even use to buy a one room in the center (as I understood). It should be planned very well and then implemented. That is why that goverment is so inefficient.

Guys and girls, Don't use bowflex machines anymore, they are dangerous. "Hundreds of thousands of popular Bowflex fitness machines are being recalled because of safety problems that have resulted in more than 70 injuries, the government said Thursday." Personally I prefer exercise on fresh air, and don't use any fitness machine. How about you all

What is UFC?

Few days ago was a meeting of Armenian Assembly of America. And they have issued a letter to the president Bush (just before his meeting with prime minister of Turkey), where they were asking to urge Turkish govermentto lift blockade against ARmenia, which does not promote security and prosperity. And it was signed by different senators. 1. Can somebody make comments about the blockade. As much as I know, there is no blockade now and a lot of armenians go to the Tutrkey for business or even for vacation. What are they talking about? 2. Yesterday, I was watching a press conference with Turkish Prime minister Recep Tayyip Ergodan. He was answering questions very well about situation in Greece, Cyprus, Turkish position in relation to the war against terrorism. However, whe he was asked about the situation in Souhtern part of Europe and Asia, he was very superficial and he mentioned Georgia few times and never Mentioned anything about Armenia (AGAIN ARMENIA WAS LEFT OVER BETWEEN BIG PLAYERS) It is outrageous. I hope that somebody will bring them to the response in front of international socisty for what they have done.

The religion has been used, you are absolutely right about that. However, it has been used to push somebodies ideology, which is warlike. But I can't agree with you that religion itself makes you more or less warlike or submissive. And I absolutely agree with 2 last comments from Alex. You brought Buddhism as an example. OK. Look what they did with Tibet. It was not even different religion. Yes, they were communists, who did that. Communism is an ideology, not a religion. Religion is used to gather people together, and act to push their ideology.

I did not say that Gitler has something to do christianity and I did not mean the all great leaders personally. The nations under them were very warlike. (sorry, I should have been more precise, Carthegeneans, Mongolians, Romans, Germans, French etc). That what I meant. May be they were an atheists. I don't know. What I know the religion was used (as a force to gather people together) in each of the wars on this planet. Moreover, the nations were becoming more warlike under warlike leaders. And if you sayd, they were atehists, may be atheism made you more warlike (what I don't really believe). And who said that other religions don't preach "caring for your fellow human being". And all of the leaders I mentioned with all their nations belonged to one or another religions. In my opinion, no religion makes you more or less warlike or obeidient.

We have to be proud with Armenians like that. One thought bothers me. There are many armenians foundation that help Armenia. How do they help? Where all that money go? Why people in Armenia are still without jobs and on charities from their relatives? Probably 60% of population in Armenia don't work: they can't find the work place. The remaining half just involved in "very" small business. You can't improve your economy with that kind business. My understanding was, in this case ("big money" help), it should be directed into opening of big factories, manufactures. Giving people the opportunity to work. That is how the economy of the country raises. Besides, it will be good for the people who invests. Otherwise, all that money entering the country and disappears. The people who need it (I am not saying directly give it to people, again through the job market) don't get it. I hope there are smart people in the armenian goverment (or will come soon) who will improve the gross economy of the counry, as sooner as better.

I think reparation is the correct word to use here. Reparation- offering expiation, or giving satisfaction for a wrong or injury, compensation in money or materials payable for damages. And it is not restition, it is restitution- a restoration of something to its rightful owner (which is not a bad idea, but I think it is almost impossibble). And I am absolutely agree with you, no forgiveness for them. No nation should be forgiven for genocide of the other nation. I am not suggesting to be hostile to every turk you meet. But, it shoulld be brought to the point thst turkish goverment accepts it, and if they do, then they will start to teach children the correct history and not falsified. Then, the new generation will be raised with knowledge of it, and probably with the respect to armenian nation. I don't want make any comments here about the Jews in Germany because I don't know much about it. But I think they feel pretty comfortable there.

If you can find in the internet or the book about Machu Picchu in Peru, it is holy city of incas. First, the place is magnificent, second it gave the scientists a lot of information about the rituals, culture etc of incas. I disagree that incas will progrees more without the influence of europian culture. However, it was very cruel an ruthless invasion by spanish, which is absolutely unacceptable. All american continent has been inavded in the same fashion.

This is an article that I was able to pull for you. I hope it will help you to prepare questions for him. Let us know what happened. Thank you. The New Thinking Revisited Gerard Libaridian Speaks at Princeton University The presidency of Levon Ter-Petrossian was credited by its advocates for not only ushering Armenia into a new era of independent statehood and multiparty democracy, but also bringing about a revolution in Armenian political thought. In a presentation at Princeton University on 9 May 1998,1 Gerard J. Libaridian, a leading herald of this "new thinking,"2 acknowledged the failure of the political theory and offered an analysis of the reasons for that failure. Libaridian, who holds a Ph.D. in history from the University of California, Los Angeles, was an advisor to the president of Armenia from 1991 to September 1997. During that period he served as Senior Advisor for foreign policy and security issues (1994–97), First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs (1993–94), negotiator for the Nagorno-Karbakh conflict, and coordinator of conflict-related policy in the Office of the President. According to Libaridian, Armenia’s foreign policy since independence in 1991 has been based on three principles: (1) security through the maintenance of good relations with all neighbors, (2) preservation of independence, and (3) the integration of Armenia into regional and wider international organizations. The immediate fear was that "Russia could develop a neoimperial desire and Armenia could lose its independence." That fear drew Armenia in the direction of Iran and Turkey. On the other hand, the desire to have a security system to defend Armenia against "any potential Turkish action" drew Armenia toward Russia. Armenia did not feel Azerbaijan was a threat. It had no problems with Georgia. Preservation of independence, then, required "some kind of balanced set of relations with the three major neighbors—Russia, Turkey, and Iran." Relations with Turkey In this conceptual framework, the Armenian Genocide was not put up as a problem, as a basis for relations with Turkey. This is very critical because the politicization of the Genocide had served, wittingly or unwittingly, to create the mentality and psychology that Turkey, through its nonrecognition of the Genocide, is likely to repeat it, that Turkey is the eternal enemy. If Turkey is the eternal enemy, then Russia is the eternally necessary friend. And this then creates pressures on your policy of independence. Armenia set out to establish "normal relations with Turkey without preconditions." This was the crux of the "revolution in Armenian political thought." It "defies most Armenians’ view of their history, of the role Turkey has played and is likely to play in the future." In practice, however, Turkey "did not accept the same basis of normalization of relations, that is, no preconditions," and although it recognized Armenia’s independence, it has refused to this day to establish diplomatic relations. Turkey made the resolution of the conflict with Azerbaijan a precondition for the establishment of diplomatic relations with Armenia. Where There’s a Will, There’s a Way Under the principle of "security through the maintenance of good relations with all neighbors," Armenia was opposed to the progressive escalation and brutalization of the Gharabagh conflict. Libaridian said that until the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Gharabagh conflict had the nature of a call for an internal administrative change. After independence, "the demand for unification would have been territorial aggrandizement and annexation, and it was the principle of self-determination that became functional, but Ter-Petrossian insisted on the need for a compromise." Ter-Petrossian believed that the Gharabagh conflict could be resolved by negotiations that were not limited by the invocation of the lofty principles of territorial integrity and self-determination. Such formulaic approaches limited the possibilities of a permanent negotiated settlement. It would be more productive to talk about the actual relations Armenians and Azerbaijanis wanted to have, and then to look at how such ends could be achieved, irrespective of the labels applied—federalism, confederalism, high autonomy, low autonomy, etc. Ter-Petrossian simply insisted that Armenians in Gharabagh should have "their individual, collective, and territorial rights respected, which would not necessarily amount to independence." Indeed, in "a very fundamental positioning," Armenia refused to recognize Gharabagh’s unilateral declaration of independence in 1992. President Aliyev of Azerbaijan eventually "did come to the same conclusion that a compromise was needed." But every time Azerbaijan came close to a concession it started thinking we don’t need to do this, maybe we can do this in a different way and not give away any concessions. This was also paralleled by the policy of strangulating Gharabagh and Armenia diplomatically and economically, and bypassing negotiations every time negotiations got to the point something could have been initialed or signed. Finally, Azerbaijan treated the people of Gharabagh as an enemy, "which was a major paradox because if you claimed that these are your citizens you should be able to sit and talk to them rather than treating them as the enemy and giving them absolutely no reason to trust you." The International Community Libaridian found that a number of factors have compromised the credibility of the international community, which has not played a constructive role in establishing stability in the region. In many cases the mediators have obstructed progress, sometimes putting the parties to the conflict "in the position of mediating between the mediators." Indeed, in some cases, international mediators disrupted agreements, in line with their own agendas. Libaridian stated that there have been at least two successful Russian attempts to disrupt an agreement, one successful American attempt, and one Turkish—not to mention the unsuccessful ones. The question of pipelines and oil has been the occasion for bullying and intimidation, which has undermined "the confidence and trust of people in Gharabagh and Armenia." Libaridian said that there was an effort by the West to create an East-West axis—Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and the Central Asian states—and "that would appear as an attempt to divide Russia from Armenia, Russia from Iran, isolate Russia, encircle Russia, and it becomes a very dangerous thing for Russia." United States encouragement of Turkey to play a very active role, given that Turkey has its own agenda in the region, translated into full support of the Azerbaijani position. That made "the United States position very suspect and counterproductive in the negotiations." The Fall Of Ter-Petrossian By 1996 it was clear that Turkey would not establish normal diplomatic relations with Armenia and would continue its unqualified support for Azerbaijan. Ter-Petrossian embarked on two last-ditch efforts to reach agreements with Turkey and Azerbaijan that involved mutual compromise. Emboldened by oil contracts, however, Azerbaijan stopped negotiating and went to the OSCE summit with a proposal that would predetermine the outcome of the negotiations. Ter-Petrossian vetoed it. Turkey steadfastly refused even to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia. It based its policies "on ethnic affinities—unlike Iran which based its relations with Azerbaijan and Armenia on strategic and state policy considerations." The two thrusts failed for Ter-Petrossian. Ultimately, "Ter-Petrossian had nothing to show for the revolutionary thinking he had displayed." There were no concessions from Azerbaijan; there was no help from Turkey; no help from the international community. "Seven years of attempts to normalize, to rule out preconditions, failed, and the thinking reemerged in Armenia that Turkey is and may be in fact the eternal enemy and Ter-Petrossian was wrong." Armenia’s foreign policy under Ter-Petrossian was not based on conflict resolution, Libaridian said. Now another kind of thinking predominates, in which "the conflict is at the center of foreign policy." The new foreign minister has started to talk about the Genocide as part of the agenda in relations with the Turkish state. "Toward the end, the debate in the higher circles of Gharabagh and Armenia was [about] whether it was possible to have serious economic growth and a rise in the standard of living without resolving the conflict. Mr. Ter-Petrossian thought not. Mr. Kocharian thought yes. Mr. Kocharian is the president today." Libaridian concluded by warning that if Turkey, Azerbaijan, and members of the international community fail to reassess their negotiating positions and "to avoid the mistakes of the past, this shift of emphasis, can turn out to be a shift of strategic thinking as well."

It is a viscous cycle. Accepting the genocide will automatically brings a reparation programs (money, houses, lands etc). When Kol went to Israel and took his hat and bowed to jewish people, he was not offering money, he was apologizing for his countrymen who did it. Then he went back and it took years to establish reparative programs (money, houses, citizenships etc). Turkey must accept what they have done. That is the thing, if they accept it, tey will be forced to establish reparation programs. But this speech of Dick Cheney really bothers me. He asked UN to accept Turkey. They definitely have their interests there.

I, kind of doubt that anything good wiill happen at the forum. Did you hear what Dick Cheney recently asked(required) UN to do in relation to Turkey? I think it is the most outrageous thing. One of the (non-written) rules for turkey to become a member of UN was acceptance of genocide. I think this is the time for big players, who usually defend their interests and small players loose. Unfortuaneatly, but the history has many facts like that.