Tonight I am attending a film:

‘Karabakh: what price sovereignty? a film presentation and roundtable discussion. Speakers: Directors - Mamuka Kuparadze (Studio Re, Georgia) and Svetlana Korsaia (Abkhazian State Television, Abkhazia). Chair: Laurence Broers, editor of Conciliation Resources - forthcoming Accord publication on the Karabakh conflict.

I’m looking forward to seeig what they have to say… more details later tonight.

James Tufenkian, who is in rug manufacturing and tourism development business in Armenia, has been recognized by Travel and Leisure magazine for “defending the historical, cultural, and ecological integrity of tourist destinations.”

Specifically,

The magazine paid tribute to seven innovative programs and initiatives across seven categories in the inaugural Global Vision Awards. Selected by a jury of seven distinguished global travel authorities, the winners are defending the historical, cultural, and ecological integrity of various regions throughout the world and are featured in the magazine’s December issue.

The winners are:
Economic Development: Tufenkian Artisan Carpets, Nepal and Armenia
New York-based James Tufenkian has enhanced the economy of developing communities in Nepal and Armenia by implementing worker-welfare programs, providing schools, housing, medical facilities and a water-purification plant for thousands of artisans and craftspeople.

Since the previous posting has been transformed into discussion of what the newly amended Constitution entails, let’s repost the primer on the amendments that the RFERL translated.

more…

According to PanArmenian.net, with 1901 out of 1922 precincts processed, the Central Electoral Commission reports that the turnout in the referendum was 65%, and over 93% voted for the Constitutional referendum.

This is of course the most lopsided poll result ever in Armenia’s post-independence history. Very curious results. Equally (but positively) surprising is the amazing speed with which the results were posted by the CEC.

The opposition (which boycotted the vote and gave up its right to monitor the vote through precinct commissions) suggests that the turnout is heavily inflated. According to PanArmenian.net:

According to the Public Information Center of the United Opposition, as of 8:00 p.m. local time 374667 constituents have voted throughout the territory of Armenia, which makes 16.3% of the total number of electors. «The referendum is not legitimate and constitutional amendments were not passed, If the authorities cannot normally and legitimately organize a process, there is no choice except revolution» New Times opposition party leader Aram Karapetyan said during a news conference in Yerevan today, in which leaders of united opposition parties also took part.

The protest rally/civic forum called by Armenia’s popular opposition leaders Aram Sargsian and Raffi Hovannisian (among others) brought together about 1200 people, and had to disperse for lack of momentum (and lack of support from popular opposition leaders Stepan Demirchian and Artashes Geghamian). We are assured that Monday will be (another) decisive day for the opposition.

The most curious comment, however, came from Turkey where one of the newspaper bemoaned the removal of ban on dual citizenship which will give ‘evil Diaspora’ more leeway in Armenian politics.

Things to watch for today: the turnout at the opposition rally; the statements by the U.S. and PACE; who will take credit for the Yes victory and how.

U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans penned an op-ed on the Referendum, which appeared in several Armenian newspapers today.

DAY OF DECISION

Much has been said and written about the forthcoming referendum on the proposed amendments to the Constitution that will take place on Sunday. I do not intend to debate the merits of the package that will be put to Armenia’s voters; our position is well known and we support the recent statement of the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in this matter. But I do wish to make clear that, in our view, a time of civic responsibility is at hand. How the authorities and the voting population of the Republic of Armenia conduct their affairs over the next few days is, of course, an internal matter. But in today’s shrunken world, where news travels at the speed of light, what happens here will inevitably become known and influence opinion in places far away, for better or for worse. History has shown more than once that it is not enough, in a democracy, to have fine words on paper enshrined in a fundamental law, or constitution…

…Armenia has an opportunity this Sunday to demonstrate that it can conduct a ballot without irregularity. We hope all of Armenia’s eligible voters will exercise their civic duty. If there is any lesson that ought to have been learned from the events of the last few years, in both hemispheres, it is that defrauding the voters, or preventing them from exercising their right to express their choice, hurts the country, its citizens and the incumbent authorities. Even in the case of elections or referenda that are adequately monitored by trained and experienced international election observers, much inevitably depends on the seriousness and sense of responsibility of the officials whose job it is to administer and oversee the process of voting. If they do an honest and effective job, everyone will win, no matter what the final result may be. If, on the contrary, there are serious irregularities, everyone will lose…

As the international awareness of XX century atrocities grow, more and more instances of genocide are being discussed and being raised. One such issue is the Holodomor, the policy of famine carried out by the Soviet authorities in then-Soviet Ukraine in 1930’s.

As a matter of fact, this instance of genocide is also recognized by many foreign governments, including the United States. President Yuschenko this week called for a wider recognition. The anniversary is marked on November 26.

Just like the Turkish government is fighting the Armenian genocide recognition campaign, the Holodomor as a subject is not welcomed by the Russian political elite which has increasingly embraced all aspects of the Soviet historical propaganda.

BBC notes:

Roman Serbyn, professor of history and a Ukrainian expert at the University of Quebec in Montreal, says: “Ukraine did not make a technically clear case.” He believes the “genocide” designation has proved elusive because the famine is often considered to have been aimed at a social group (peasants) rather than a national or ethnic group. However, a strong case can be put showing that by closing the borders so Ukrainians could not escape to Russia, Stalin was targeting Ukrainian nationals, he says.

Russia opposes designation as genocide, he says, and “the biggest reason is national pride. But also the political and economic consequences… if you recognise a crime you might have to pay compensation”.

In 2003 Russia’s ambassador to Ukraine, Viktor Chernomyrdin, was quoted by Interfax news agency dismissing talk of an apology or compensation, saying: “We’re not going to apologise… there is nobody to apologise to.”

I think the Tsitsernakaberd Museum must include an exhibit on the Holodomor, as well as other atrocities of the Stalin regime that targeted specific nationalities.

A resolution passed by Black Sea Economic Council this week called for reopening of the Gyumri-Kars railroad, currently closed due to the Turkish blockade. Surprisingly, the Turkish delegation is said to have voted for it as well. As the Regnum story tells it,

On November 24, a session of the Parliamentary Assembly of Black Sea Economic Cooperation (PABSEC) in Tirana (Albania) supported a proposition of the Armenian delegation to start of railroad line Kars (Turkey) – Gyumri (Armenia) – Tbilisi (Georgia) – Baku (Azerbaijan). Armenia is motivated by the fact, that the railroad, which is currently idle because of Turkey’s position, could connect four countries of the region – Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Turkey.

Head of the Armenian delegation in PABSEC and Chairman of the Armenian Standing Parliamentary Committee on Financial, Credit, Budgetary and Economic Affairs Gagik Minasyan assured that the Turkish delegation also voted for Armenian proposition. It is noteworthy, that Turkey blocked the movement through this railway line because of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and overall hostile relations with Armenia.

The reason for Armenia’s success is the turmoil in Azerbaijan - because of unsettled elections, the Azeri delegation was not even present at the BSEC meeting.

It seems like President Kocharian read Katy’s post on Nagorno Karabakh and decided to rectify the situation with NK being unrecognized. In an interview to a Slovenian newspaper, he mentioned that Armenia could either recognize NK or simply annex it if negotiations with Azerbaijan do not move forward. According to Regnum:

“If the negotiations with Azerbaijan will exhaust themselves without any result, Armenia can recognize the Nagorno Karabakh Republic and let it join Armenia,” said Kocharyan.

According to Kocharyan, de-facto, Armenia recognized Nagorno Karabakh long time ago. “Currently, Nagorno Karabakh uses the Armenian currency – dram. We also have common custom zone, so the integration process continues. Now I can call the relations between Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh a disproportional confederation,” stressed Kocharyan.

Another link to the same story.

Raffi H is holding his rally in Yerevan today to protest the Constitutional referendum on Sunday.

What’s more interesting, though, is how different the coverage of the event is between various media in Armenia. Looks like some of them are spinning news events, instead of reporting them.

E.g., RFE/RL reports:

Raffi Hovannisian, one of Armenia’s most popular opposition leaders, declared the weekend constitutional referendum illegitimate on Friday as he held his first-ever rally in Yerevan marked by an unusually heavy police presence. Hovannisian charged that the Armenian authorities have already made a free and fair vote impossible and said only a minority of voters will back their draft constitutional referendum on Sunday.

…Scores of special police guarded a stage outside the national Opera House from which they sang, danced and played various instruments. About two dozen vans and jeeps filled with police officers and a truck laden with riot gear were on standby in a nearby quiet street. The security forces were personally led by General Hovannes Varian, the controversial deputy chief of the national police who led the brutal dispersal of an opposition rally in April 2004. Hovannisian arrived at the scene but avoided any confrontation with the police. The young performers were left with virtually no spectators when he led supporters to a much smaller site on the other side of the opera building. He was joined by other opposition leaders shortly afterwards. They also addressed the rally, reiterating calls for a popular boycott of the referendum…

No mention of how many people showed up. ArmeniaNow.com, on the other hand, has this to say.

Boycotting the Boycott?: Friday rally attendance short of “mass protest”
By ArmeniaNow staff and sources

In response to calls from Armenia’s opposition parties, rallies are being held in Yerevan this weekend, encouraging citizens to boycott Sunday’s referendum on a new Constitution. (Likewise, the pro-government alliance has used state television and other media for their propaganda, and are sponsoring a pop music concert tonight, November 25.)

Today, while on-stage rehearsals for the pro-government concert took the larger portion of “Freedom Square” on the sunny side of the Opera House, a group of about a couple hundred huddled in the cold shade around composer Aram Khachataryan’s statue to hear former Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi Hovannisian rally them to “make the authorities return the power to the people”.

Regnum, in turns, says most of rally participants left to watch the concert. Some 100-150 participants are said to have stayed after the dark, although only Raffi H and Aram Z Sarkisian are there to talk to them.

The US Embassy in Yerevan issued a statement to American citizens urging them not to mingle amongst protestors for safety reasons.

Sounds familiar.

The Financial Times noted today that investors should keep chugging their money into Azerbaijan regardless of political activities there. Ian Bremmer wrote this article.

He tells investors: “Assuming that opposition protests do not grow and change in character over the next couple of weeks, investors can continue to find profitable opportunities in oil-rich Azerbaijan.”

There are several reasons why Azerbaijan remains stable. First, President Aliyev is popular. When a son inherits power from his father, many assume he will struggle to consolidate power. But Mr Aliyev has shed his playboy image and earned considerable respect within Azerbaijan and the region.

Second, Mr Aliyev inherited an economy infused with petro-dollars. No end is in sight to the high oil prices that bolster Azerbaijan’s economy, and Mr Aliyev has undertaken some modest economic reforms. He is backed by Azerbaijan’s military establishment.

Third, and most important, Azerbaijan’s opposition is badly fragmented. During Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003 and Ukraine’s Orange Revolution in 2004, the efforts of individual charismatic and well-known opposition figures to dislodge entrenched elites enjoyed broad public support. In Azerbaijan, rivalries among opposition leaders cripple the ability of the factions to pool their resources.

Tonight I went to a great talk at SOAS by Forum18. You probably recognize the name Felix Corley, as that is the individual that sends the information to Groong.

It was nice meeting Felix in person after all these years and he and his associate editor, John, had a number of interesting things to say about the state of religious freedom in the Caucasus. What was also nice was meeting a lot of new people (and people that I knew their name but hadn’t met) in London.

There is a thriving Armenian-related academic community here. At this event I learned that Dr. Dadrian is speaking tommorow night (which I can’t attend because my best friend from the States is flying in around the same time and I need to get her settled into my house). This weekend there is an Armenian festival — which I am not sure about because I have to teach on Saturday and may go visit a friend in Southern England on Sunday. Next week there is a Karabakh film. I also attended a talk on the region last week.

That’s a lot of events in one month!

Very stimulating and fun. I keep on meeting great people too.

I’ll try to do a write up on the religious freedom talk sometime soon. With my friend coming into town this week, a different friend next week, and a different set of friends the week after, a number of essays to work on and two internships - oh, and tutoring and a help desk job… my life is getting busy again. I’ll get back to business soon!

But, I’ll be in California for December and January for about a month. I’ll be unpacking a house, but if any Blogrel California readers want to meet up - let me know!

HETQ brings to us a story about yet another forest in Armenia that is slated for destruction by a commercial entity.

Armenian Copper plans to destroy the forest in order to open and exploit the copper and molybdenum mines located beneath it, as well as to build an extraction plant nearby. According to Minister of Ecology Vardan Aivazyan, the reevaluation of mineral reserves in the Teghut mine was slated for completion in the last quarter of 2007. The minister was thus convinced that the mine could not be exploited before 2007. But it should be noted that any major decisions will be taken earlier, and deforestation will naturally precede the exploitation and processing of the mine. Therefore, there is little solace for ecological organizations and the general public in the fact that exploitation will begin no earlier than two years from now.

According to Aivazyan once again, “Armenian Copper has already completed its study of the Teghut mine and preliminary data show that there are reserves of up to 500 million tons of copper and molybdenum.”

Another piece from RFE/RL attempts to dissect the opposition boycott of the Constitutional referendum:

The Armenian opposition is talking a good fight. It is boycotting the 27 November referendum, it says, because the vote is a pretense of democracy. Former Foreign Minister Raffi Hovanissian, who has joined the call for a boycott, described the government this week as a “regime that supports thieves, murderers, and corrupt individuals.”

Like other opposition leaders, Hovanissian is calling for a campaign of “civil disobedience.”

“From the afternoon of Friday, 25th November, we will transform [Yerevan’s] Opera Square into an arena of freedom,” Hovanissian said. “I invite all citizens of the Republic of Armenia to take part in a civil-assembly initiative that on November 27th will become a powerful national demonstration.”

Yet, the opposition finds itself out on a limb. The European Union, the Council of Europe, and the United States have described the proposed changes to the constitution as vital to the process of reform. Yesterday, the president of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, Rene van der Linden, effectively threw his weight against the opposition by urging all voters to participate. It was, he said, an opportunity for Armenians to show their commitment to Europe.

Failure of the referendum due to a low turnout would be a major setback for Armenia’s progress in fulfilling some of the most important commitments the country made when joining the Council of Europe…

RFE/RL translated a brochure from the Armenian Government with the explanations of the key amendments to the Constitution that will go on referendum this Sunday. The text is available here.

Example:

3. What is the essence of the restrictions imposed on the presidential powers and what is the rationale for them?
In a semi-presidential system, the president is in a position to seek to maintain a balance and to safeguard the normal functioning of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches only if he has the constitutionally guaranteed possibility of exerting influence on the activities of all three branches of power. At the same time, it is clear that the president may not deprive the branches of power of the possibility of acting independently, and from this angle the amendments are intended to substantially limit the powers of the president of the republic in his relations with the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

In the relations between the president and the parliament, it is envisaged to abolish the exclusive right of the president of the republic to dissolve the National Assembly. In addition, it is the position of the parliament, not that of the president, that is decisive when it comes to forming the government.

It is envisaged to transfer to the National Assembly other aspects of the powers of the president of the republic. Thus, under the present constitution it is the president who appoints and dismisses the prosecutor-general at the proposal of the prime minister, whereas the constitutional amendments envisage that the National Assembly will appoint the prosecutor-general at the proposal of the president of the republic (Article 103). One more example: under the existing constitution, the president can convene an emergency session of the National Assembly, while after the amendments have been passed that right will devolve on the chairman of the National Assembly (Article 70). In line with the constitutional amendments the president will not establish the structure of the government or monitor the decisions of the government, and he will no longer head the Council of Justice.

6. Why are the provisions on presidential immunity written into the constitution, and what will the legal consequences of those provisions be?

We are not talking about total immunity for the president but for immunity for those actions that result from his formal status. The powers of the president of the republic are exhaustively defined by the constitution. It is these powers that limit the immunity of the president , because after expiry of his term the president can be brought to justice for actions that are not connected with his formal status (Article 56.1, Part 2). In addition, the president of the republic can be removed from office for treason and other grave crimes regardless of whether his criminal actions are connected with his official position. He can also be brought to trial after his removal from office. There are similar provisions with regard to presidential immunity in the constitutions of other states, including Romania (Article 95), Bulgaria (Article 102), Lithuania (Article 86), Poland (Article 145), and others. The purpose of this is to protect the president of the republic from politically motivated criminal prosecution.

7. Society has always been harshly critical of the legal system. What amendments are to be made to the constitution with regard to the courts in order to improve people’s trust in the legal system?

Improving the work of the courts is a complex problem that requires the implementation of economic, social, organizational, and educational measures. In present conditions particular attention is paid to ensuring the independence of courts and judges. This is the basic aim of the proposed constitutional amendments. Under the existing constitution the president of the republic is chairman of the Council of Justice and the justice minister and the prosecutor-general serve as deputy chairmen. Essentially, by means of the Council of Justice the president oversees the appointment of judges and assigns specific questions to them. If the constitutional amendments are adopted, it is the chairman of the Appeals Court who will chair sessions of the Council of Justice, although he will not have voting rights. This will significantly reduce the possibilities for the president of the republic and representatives of the executive to influence decisions made by the Council of Justice, which will in fact become something like an organ of self-government for judges.

The role of the Appeals Court in the legal system will change drastically. According to the proposed amendment to Article 92, the Appeals Court is called upon to ensure the uniform application of the law. The aim of the proposed amendment is to limit the scope for judges to interpret the law arbitrarily and hand down arbitrary judgments, to exclude the possibility of judges handing down diverging rulings and verdicts in identical cases.

The proposed amendment to Article 18 of the constitution will also serve to improve the work of the courts. In accordance with the international obligations of the Republic of Armenia, that amendment gives everyone the right to appeal to international organs to defend his human rights and freedoms. We have already touched on that. We will add only that the practical implementation of that provision will provide for the real influence of international legal organs on the functioning of the Armenian legal system and will help to ensure that the work of our courts corresponds to international criteria and norms.

PACE President called on Armenian citizens to participate in the upcoming Constitutional referendum, essentially counteracting the opposition calls for a boycott.

The President of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, René van der Linden, has appealed to all Armenian citizens to participate in the forthcoming Constitutional referendum on 27 November.

“The revision of the Constitution is a major political event that will affect the daily lives of all Armenian citizens. It is therefore important that everyone expresses their opinion,” he said. “Failure of this referendum due to a too low turnout, a repetition of what happened during the first Constitutional referendum on 25 May 2003, would be a major setback for Armenia’s progress in fulfilling some of the most important commitments the country made when joining the Council of Europe.” The President concluded: “This is an opportunity for Armenians to show their commitment to Europe.”

Armenian newspapers report that National Assembly Speaker Artur Baghdasaryan said he had been invited to speak at the Kiev Independence Square - The Maidan - by the country’s president Viktor Yuschenko on the occasion of the first anniversary of the Orange Revolution. Made it sound like he didn’t really want to go but what could he do? Yuschenko really begged him to come since he (Yuschenko) knows Artur is a big-time democrat.

Amusing, actually, how all Armenian politicians are clamoring for a piece of orange revolution credentials.

Links:
Regnum

A new website, funded by the US and British Embassies, for exploration… newneighbors.am… here’s what they have to say about themselves:

The situation in the South Caucasus changes dynamically. Neighboring countries today and several years ago – are different units, with different role and different approach towards their future. Today we all percept each other as New Neighbors – countries, which are in a new situation and have the necessity for new approaches towards their mutual relations.

There is something else tha is new in our region: it’s the European Neighborhood Policy, which has created a new prospect for the development of our region. The European integration and aspirations towards Western values are the main links to join the neighbors, divided by various problems.

Three Southcaucasian countries are involved in the European Neighborhood Policy. Turkey – the most powerful country of the South Caucasus, has been tending to join the EU for decades. All these processes of course have a deep impact on the formation of a new profile for the region, creating a need to communicate in a new way.

The partnership between Armenia and Georgia, Georgia and Turkey can play an increasingly important role, bridging the separated neighbors through new links, becoming mediators for the establishment of peace and cooperation in the region. The first thing to achieve this is the establishment of really open and positive dialogue between the peoples.

The Public Dialogue will allow discussing all the painful issues in a tolerant atmosphere, showing the world that South Caucasus is ready to integrate into the discourse of societies and civilizations, initiated after the WW II. The Center for Public Dialogue and Development has initiated this project to unite the efforts of all the people, who are not indifferent towards the future of our region, who have something to say in this large dialogue and who know the real value of tolerance and peaceful neighborhood.

The Sister Cities Program - it is fun and nice and in every way honest and good, right?

Looks like one sister is in a bunch of trouble!

Montebello, California added Stepanakert to its Sister City Program on September 25. Now Azerbaijan is not happy about it.

Azerbaijan Ambassador Hafiz Pashayev has written to both Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Montebello Mayor Bill Molinari, warning that sensitive peace negotiations with Armenia could be disrupted by Montebello’s move to create a sister-city relationship with Stepanakert.

The Governor said it was a local issue. The mayor said that they are going to continue operating the Program.

The Armenian who suggested that Stepanakert be added to the program had this to say:

The Sister City idea was created in the hopes of sharing resources with Nagorno Karabakh and encouraging investment by Americans, Samoniantz said.

To complicate matters, President Gukhasyan visited Montebello this weekend.

[source]

A poll conducted by a Russian NGO found out that 64.5% of citizens of Armenia said they would participate in the Constitutional referendum, according to Regnum.

The Russian non-profit Caucasian Institute for Democracy Development Foundation has carried out monitoring of the attitudes of the Armenian population towards the constitutional reforms process in the country. The poll was conducted in September-October in all ten regions of Armenia and in the capital, Yerevan. In each region, 100 persons of both sexes, different educational background, income level, and occupations were questioned. In Yerevan 600 persons participated in the poll.

65.4% confirmed they would participate in the constitutional referendum scheduled for November 27, which is the evidence of citizens’ interest and involvement. 59.3% think the constitutional amendments are necessary. Meanwhile, only 47.2% of the respondents said they had acquainted themselves with the proposed changes, partially or fully, and 52.8% said they knew nothing about them. In this connection, most respondents (55.4%) cannot say what the reforms would change (23.8%), and 31.6% believe there will be no change at all. The rest 44.6% give contradictory answers: 17.9% say, the presidential powers will increase, 11.2% believe, the role of the National assembly will increase, 15.8% hope, the reforms would bring balance into the power branches.

This also means most people still don’t know what exactly is in the draft (devolution of powers away from the Presidency).

Only 5.7% are sure, the referendum will be held without violations, 80.5% believe, it is impossible, and 33.1% do not rule out mass violations, while 47.4% think, the violations will not influence on the outcome of the referendum.