Ex-deputy prime minister John Prescott is heading a diplomatic mission aimed at defusing Armenia's political crisis.
A state of emergency has been in force in the capital, Yerevan, since 1 March, after violence erupted amid allegations of vote-rigging in recent elections.
Mr Prescott is visiting as a member of the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly, which he joined in October.
He will meet outgoing president Robert Kocharian and president-elect Serzh Sarkisian during his two-day trip.
The crisis followed recent presidential elections, in which the prime minister, Mr Sarkisian, officially beat the main opposition leader, Levon Ter-Petrosian, by a wide margin.
Mr Ter-Petrosian, a former president, claims the election was rigged.
At the time of the elections on 19 February, John Prescott headed a similar delegation which travelled around Armenia, observing the poll.
They judged the election to have been generally democratic, but said there had been some problems with the counting of votes.
Official election results in Armenia gave Serzh Sarkisian 53% of the vote, and Levon Ter-Petrosian 21.5%.
A state of emergency was imposed as violence flared in Yerevan
The Council of Europe has sent Mr Prescott back to Armenia on what it calls a "snap visit", concerned by the violence and the imposition of the state of emergency.
The aim is to "assess the post-electoral situation... and explore possibilities for defusing the current political crisis and promoting dialogue", the Council said in a statement.
Mr Prescott will also meet defeated candidate Levon Ter-Petrosian.
Opposition anger
The crisis in Armenia began when opposition demonstrators responded to electoral defeat with 11 days of mass demonstrations in the capital, setting up barricades in Yerevan's city centre.
The government declared the protests were illegal, and on 1 March police fought pitched battles with demonstrators on the streets.
Police clashed with protesters in Yerevan on 1 March
Eight people who had been demonstrating in support of the defeated opposition candidate, Levon Ter-Petrosian, were killed. About 100 others were injured in the violence.
Mr Ter-Petrosian was placed under house arrest, but has been allowed out to attend proceedings at the Constitutional Court to challenge the election results.
Mr Prescott joined the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe last October, as leader of the UK contingent of 18 Westminster MPs.
The Council of Europe is a body founded in 1949 to promote democratic ideals and human rights in Europe, and is not part of the apparatus of the European Union.
пятница, 7 марта 2008 г.
Armenian Parliament Sanctions Arrest Of Opposition MPs
Armenia’s parliament on Tuesday gave a green light for the arrest and prosecution on coup charges of four of its members loyal to former President Levon Ter-Petrosian. Miasnik Malkhasian, Hakob Hakobian, Sasun Mikaelian and Khachatur Sukiasian will be formally charged under articles of the Criminal Code relating to attempts to seize power and provoke riots for that purpose. The charges stem from Saturday’s deadly clashes between Ter-Petrosian supporters and security forces that followed the forcible break-up of an opposition sit-in in Yerevan’s Liberty Square. Lawmakers voted overwhelmingly to lift their colleagues’ immunity from prosecution after a speech by Prosecutor-General Aghvan Hovsepian. He reiterated government allegations that the clashes had been planned by the Ter-Petrosian-led opposition in advance. Hakobian and Malkhasian were detained on Sunday and brought to the parliament session by masked security officers. Both men were allowed to address the National Assembly and deny the accusations. The two other accused deputies appear to have gone into hiding. Hovsepian told journalists later in the day that law-enforcement authorities are also hunting for several other unspecified Ter-Petrosian allies and trying to make sure that none of them flees the country. He did not exclude that the former president may also be arrested and put on trial. “The investigation is underway and we will make a decision based on its results,” he said. The coup case was described as baseless and politically motivated by Zharangutyun Party of Raffi Hovannisian, the only opposition group represented in the 131-member National Assembly. Addressing the legislature, Hovannisian said it will only deepen the post-election unrest in the country. In a written statement, Hovannisian and the six other Zharangutyun parliamentarians condemned the use of lethal force against opposition demonstrators and expressed serious concern about the ensued arrests of opposition activists. “The reports received from the legal defenders of several arrestees allow us to assert that all of Yerevan’s detention halls are full of people who have become the patent victims of police brutality,” they said. “This situation confirms the public fear that the country’s law enforcement bodies actually do not intend to carry out a fair and unbiased investigation into this and all other tragic events which have taken the lives of Armenian citizens,” added the statement.
Armenia: The United States is Muted on the Armenian Political Crisis
By Joshua Kucera 03/05/08
The continuing political crisis Armenia stemming from the March 1 violence in Yerevan has unfolded with little comment from the United States, either from the US government or from influential Armenian-American lobbying groups.
The root cause of the crisis is found in the disputed presidential election on February 19, in which Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian was declared the winner. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Asserting that widespread fraud enabled Sarkisian’s victory, the main challenger Levon Ter-Petrossian mounted a permanent protest in Yerevan. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. A government attempt to disperse the demonstrators during the pre-dawn hours of March 1 sparked an escalating confrontation that culminated in armed clashes. Officially, eight people died in the clashes, but witnesses believe the death toll could be substantially higher. Under state of emergency regulations imposed on March 1, the government enjoys broad powers to restrict press freedom, making verification of competing claims next to impossible. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
A statement by Karekin II, the spiritual leader of the Armenian Apostolic Church, urged that both sides compromise. "Let us practice wisdom and reasoning, refraining from fraternal hostility and actions that deepen the discord. All problems and issues which trouble us, shall be solved through peaceful means, respect for the law and the safe paths of dialogue,” Karekin II said in a statement issued March 3. "Each of us must answer for our actions before history and our generations. Let us not risk the stability of our country with further unwise actions.”
Kocharian on March 5 vigorously defended his decision to impose a state of emergency, which in addition to restricting the flow on information, also allows for the limitation of non-governmental organization activity and the roll-back of civil liberties, including freedom of assembly. The president appeared to place all blame for developments on his political opponents, and vowed to “to track down all inciters, masterminds and executors of the unrest,” according to comments distributed by the official Armenpress news agency. Kocharian also stated that he had no intention of extending the state of emergency, which is due to expire on March 20.
The government’s media blackout has silenced at least five Armenian news outlets. And in a move that is sure to create difficulties for US-Armenian relations, President Robert Kocharian’s adminsitration has also suspended broadcasts of the US-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and has blocked the RFE/RL website in Armenia.
"Censorship and harassment of the media are the antithesis of democracy," James K. Glassman, chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees all non-military US international broadcasting, said in a written statement issued march 5. "Our broadcasters wish to serve the audience in Armenia by providing reliable news and information at this critical juncture. Unfortunately, that is not an option at the moment, unless you are a patient and resourceful Internet user."
There are several reasons for the relative US silence on recent developments in Armenia, analysts say. On a geopolitical level, Armenia is not deemed of vital strategic importance by Washington, as the Caucasus country lies outside the Caspian Basin energy corridor that passes through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.
In addition, the Armenian crisis is not viewed in Washington as a struggle pitting democratic forces against an authoritarian regime. It is more of an internecine struggle, in which a dispute among an entrenched political elite over the division of spoils has escalated to the point where it got out of control. Ter-Petrosian and his supporters are generally not seen as being any more democratically oriented than the incumbent Kocharian-Sarkisian team. To substantiate that point, some observers point to the fact that in the 1996 presidential election, Ter-Petroisian, who was running then as an incumbent, was accused of many of the same electoral abuses that he now assails the Kocharian administration for.
Finally, Armenian-American diaspora groups, which wield significant power in Washington’s policy towards Armenia, have chosen not to call attention to the crisis there.
The State Department issued a mildly worded statement on March 1, condemning the violence. The statement implied equal responsibility for both the government and the protesters. “Any unlawful actions such as violence and looting worsen the situation and must stop. We hope that the State of Emergency declared today will be lifted promptly and that political dialogue resumes,” the statement said.
But that is not enough, said Cory Welt, associate director of the Eurasian Strategy Project at Georgetown University. “The United States and the Europeans should certainly do one thing – stop pretending there is democratic progress where there is none. It’s one thing to shy away from giving the street false cause for optimism; it is another to be so patronizing about ‘baby steps’ toward democracy when there are none.”
“What makes the Armenian case so unusual is the willingness of the United States and Europe to move forward with business as usual when there is no business to be done - Armenia is neither a security nor an energy partner for the West,” Welt said.
Given the recent developments, Welt suggested that Washington should suspend aid from the Millennium Challenge Account, which is supposed to encourage Armenia to build democratic institutions. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The flow of Millennium Challenge assistance should not resume until there is a full, independent accounting for the violence on March 1 and 2, Welt added.
There has also been a relatively muted response from Congress, including from the members who are active in pro-Armenian issues. Armenian lobby groups have not pressed Congress to get involved in the crisis in Armenia, according to one Congressional staff member, speaking on condition of anonymity. That is partly because the lobby groups have political ties with the parties in power in Armenia, but partly because they feel that focusing on Armenia’s negatives is bad public relations.
“Frankly, in terms of the Armenian-American lobby, they get really ginned up and energized about the Armenian genocide resolution, but they don't really want to look at corruption, because that doesn't put them in a very favorable light,” the staffer said. “This doesn't help them with their agenda.” [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
The Armenian National Committee of America did not release any statement on the crisis, and as of the morning of March 5 its website carried no mention of the situation unfolding in Armenia. The Armenian Assembly of America did post a statement on its website, calling on all sides to “adhere to the rule of law and to refrain from violence, as well as to ensure that the media will cover the events as they take place with fairness and balance.” Neither organization returned calls and emails by a EurasiaNet correspondent seeking comment.
“Without energy or particular strategic importance, Armenia is left in the United States with the politically quite strong Armenian diaspora,” Welt said. “In the end, it is not the lobbies that should be held responsible, but their representatives in Congress who have far greater reason to be troubled by the hypocrisy of avoiding discussion or comparison of the internal state of Armenia when shaping US policy in its confrontations with Azerbaijan and Turkey.”
Part of the diaspora groups’ ambivalence can be explained by the fact that the main opposition candidate, Ter-Petrossian, strove to weaken the political strength of the Armenian diaspora when he was in office. In addition, his willingness to negotiate with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh angered members of the diaspora groups. Ultimately, Ter-Petrosian’s willingness to negotiate on the Karabakh issue initiated a chain of events that led to his resignation in 1998. He was replaced by Kocharian.
The Karabakh contact line dividing Armenian and Azerbaijani troops was the scene of heavy fighting on March 4-5. Azerbaijani officials on March 5 claimed that Armenian forces launched an attack, in part out of a desire to distract attention from events in Yerevan. Armenian officials countered that Azerbaijani forces initiated the clash. The death toll was placed at between eight and 16. Kocharian, in commenting on the fighting, stated that officials in Baku were trying to take advantage of Armenia’s domestic difficulties. "In all likelihood Azerbaijani leaders thought that because of recent events in Yerevan, the army of Nagorno-Karabakh has lost its vigilance or communication,” Kocharian told Armenpress
In addition, the Armenian diaspora groups tend to disengage from Armenian political issues because the corruption and authoritarianism conflict with the American values that they have acquired, said Yossi Shain, a political scientist at Georgetown University who studies the politics of diaspora groups.
“One can argue that in the mind of the diaspora, Armenia as a homeland has served more as a notion, perhaps a mythical vision than as a concrete sovereign state,” Shain said. “If the [Armenian] state represents something hostile to their ideology, they will remove themselves. They will be more keen to identify with Armenia as a whole than to identify with one regime, if it violates what they consider to be the values of America.”
Editor's Note: Joshua Kucera is a Washington, DC,-based freelance writer who specializes in security issues in Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Middle East.
The continuing political crisis Armenia stemming from the March 1 violence in Yerevan has unfolded with little comment from the United States, either from the US government or from influential Armenian-American lobbying groups.
The root cause of the crisis is found in the disputed presidential election on February 19, in which Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian was declared the winner. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Asserting that widespread fraud enabled Sarkisian’s victory, the main challenger Levon Ter-Petrossian mounted a permanent protest in Yerevan. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. A government attempt to disperse the demonstrators during the pre-dawn hours of March 1 sparked an escalating confrontation that culminated in armed clashes. Officially, eight people died in the clashes, but witnesses believe the death toll could be substantially higher. Under state of emergency regulations imposed on March 1, the government enjoys broad powers to restrict press freedom, making verification of competing claims next to impossible. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
A statement by Karekin II, the spiritual leader of the Armenian Apostolic Church, urged that both sides compromise. "Let us practice wisdom and reasoning, refraining from fraternal hostility and actions that deepen the discord. All problems and issues which trouble us, shall be solved through peaceful means, respect for the law and the safe paths of dialogue,” Karekin II said in a statement issued March 3. "Each of us must answer for our actions before history and our generations. Let us not risk the stability of our country with further unwise actions.”
Kocharian on March 5 vigorously defended his decision to impose a state of emergency, which in addition to restricting the flow on information, also allows for the limitation of non-governmental organization activity and the roll-back of civil liberties, including freedom of assembly. The president appeared to place all blame for developments on his political opponents, and vowed to “to track down all inciters, masterminds and executors of the unrest,” according to comments distributed by the official Armenpress news agency. Kocharian also stated that he had no intention of extending the state of emergency, which is due to expire on March 20.
The government’s media blackout has silenced at least five Armenian news outlets. And in a move that is sure to create difficulties for US-Armenian relations, President Robert Kocharian’s adminsitration has also suspended broadcasts of the US-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and has blocked the RFE/RL website in Armenia.
"Censorship and harassment of the media are the antithesis of democracy," James K. Glassman, chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees all non-military US international broadcasting, said in a written statement issued march 5. "Our broadcasters wish to serve the audience in Armenia by providing reliable news and information at this critical juncture. Unfortunately, that is not an option at the moment, unless you are a patient and resourceful Internet user."
There are several reasons for the relative US silence on recent developments in Armenia, analysts say. On a geopolitical level, Armenia is not deemed of vital strategic importance by Washington, as the Caucasus country lies outside the Caspian Basin energy corridor that passes through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.
In addition, the Armenian crisis is not viewed in Washington as a struggle pitting democratic forces against an authoritarian regime. It is more of an internecine struggle, in which a dispute among an entrenched political elite over the division of spoils has escalated to the point where it got out of control. Ter-Petrosian and his supporters are generally not seen as being any more democratically oriented than the incumbent Kocharian-Sarkisian team. To substantiate that point, some observers point to the fact that in the 1996 presidential election, Ter-Petroisian, who was running then as an incumbent, was accused of many of the same electoral abuses that he now assails the Kocharian administration for.
Finally, Armenian-American diaspora groups, which wield significant power in Washington’s policy towards Armenia, have chosen not to call attention to the crisis there.
The State Department issued a mildly worded statement on March 1, condemning the violence. The statement implied equal responsibility for both the government and the protesters. “Any unlawful actions such as violence and looting worsen the situation and must stop. We hope that the State of Emergency declared today will be lifted promptly and that political dialogue resumes,” the statement said.
But that is not enough, said Cory Welt, associate director of the Eurasian Strategy Project at Georgetown University. “The United States and the Europeans should certainly do one thing – stop pretending there is democratic progress where there is none. It’s one thing to shy away from giving the street false cause for optimism; it is another to be so patronizing about ‘baby steps’ toward democracy when there are none.”
“What makes the Armenian case so unusual is the willingness of the United States and Europe to move forward with business as usual when there is no business to be done - Armenia is neither a security nor an energy partner for the West,” Welt said.
Given the recent developments, Welt suggested that Washington should suspend aid from the Millennium Challenge Account, which is supposed to encourage Armenia to build democratic institutions. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The flow of Millennium Challenge assistance should not resume until there is a full, independent accounting for the violence on March 1 and 2, Welt added.
There has also been a relatively muted response from Congress, including from the members who are active in pro-Armenian issues. Armenian lobby groups have not pressed Congress to get involved in the crisis in Armenia, according to one Congressional staff member, speaking on condition of anonymity. That is partly because the lobby groups have political ties with the parties in power in Armenia, but partly because they feel that focusing on Armenia’s negatives is bad public relations.
“Frankly, in terms of the Armenian-American lobby, they get really ginned up and energized about the Armenian genocide resolution, but they don't really want to look at corruption, because that doesn't put them in a very favorable light,” the staffer said. “This doesn't help them with their agenda.” [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
The Armenian National Committee of America did not release any statement on the crisis, and as of the morning of March 5 its website carried no mention of the situation unfolding in Armenia. The Armenian Assembly of America did post a statement on its website, calling on all sides to “adhere to the rule of law and to refrain from violence, as well as to ensure that the media will cover the events as they take place with fairness and balance.” Neither organization returned calls and emails by a EurasiaNet correspondent seeking comment.
“Without energy or particular strategic importance, Armenia is left in the United States with the politically quite strong Armenian diaspora,” Welt said. “In the end, it is not the lobbies that should be held responsible, but their representatives in Congress who have far greater reason to be troubled by the hypocrisy of avoiding discussion or comparison of the internal state of Armenia when shaping US policy in its confrontations with Azerbaijan and Turkey.”
Part of the diaspora groups’ ambivalence can be explained by the fact that the main opposition candidate, Ter-Petrossian, strove to weaken the political strength of the Armenian diaspora when he was in office. In addition, his willingness to negotiate with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh angered members of the diaspora groups. Ultimately, Ter-Petrosian’s willingness to negotiate on the Karabakh issue initiated a chain of events that led to his resignation in 1998. He was replaced by Kocharian.
The Karabakh contact line dividing Armenian and Azerbaijani troops was the scene of heavy fighting on March 4-5. Azerbaijani officials on March 5 claimed that Armenian forces launched an attack, in part out of a desire to distract attention from events in Yerevan. Armenian officials countered that Azerbaijani forces initiated the clash. The death toll was placed at between eight and 16. Kocharian, in commenting on the fighting, stated that officials in Baku were trying to take advantage of Armenia’s domestic difficulties. "In all likelihood Azerbaijani leaders thought that because of recent events in Yerevan, the army of Nagorno-Karabakh has lost its vigilance or communication,” Kocharian told Armenpress
In addition, the Armenian diaspora groups tend to disengage from Armenian political issues because the corruption and authoritarianism conflict with the American values that they have acquired, said Yossi Shain, a political scientist at Georgetown University who studies the politics of diaspora groups.
“One can argue that in the mind of the diaspora, Armenia as a homeland has served more as a notion, perhaps a mythical vision than as a concrete sovereign state,” Shain said. “If the [Armenian] state represents something hostile to their ideology, they will remove themselves. They will be more keen to identify with Armenia as a whole than to identify with one regime, if it violates what they consider to be the values of America.”
Editor's Note: Joshua Kucera is a Washington, DC,-based freelance writer who specializes in security issues in Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Middle East.
YouTube Blocked in Armenia
March 7, 2008 Election Riots
We can now confirm that YouTube has been blocked in Armenia. We have spoken with several people in Armenia, and we were told that it’s fully blocked.
This is due to several riot videos being posted. It should also be noted, that A1Plus stopped posting videos there since 5 days ago. A1Plus’s website has been down for over a week also.
ArmeniaNow was also a victim of the media blackout, as we announced few days ago, it will only report official news only from now on.
Armenia also blocked several radio channels and closed several newspapers.
Armenians are now receiving only one-sided information. All people who are being interviewed on H1 Armenia’s National Channel are anti-Levon Ter-Petrosyan. All news reports are targeted against Ter-Petrosyan and people who participated during riots.
We can now confirm that YouTube has been blocked in Armenia. We have spoken with several people in Armenia, and we were told that it’s fully blocked.
This is due to several riot videos being posted. It should also be noted, that A1Plus stopped posting videos there since 5 days ago. A1Plus’s website has been down for over a week also.
ArmeniaNow was also a victim of the media blackout, as we announced few days ago, it will only report official news only from now on.
Armenia also blocked several radio channels and closed several newspapers.
Armenians are now receiving only one-sided information. All people who are being interviewed on H1 Armenia’s National Channel are anti-Levon Ter-Petrosyan. All news reports are targeted against Ter-Petrosyan and people who participated during riots.
Armenia's Bloody Saturday Shatters Election Deadlock -
Richard Weitz Bio 05 Mar 2008World Politics Review Exclusive
On March 1, the conflict over the disputed outcome of last month's presidential elections in Armenia turned deadly when riot police and Interior Ministry troops clashed with armed opposition demonstrators in the capital city. Dozens of people were killed or injured in downtown Yerevan, where tens of thousands of Armenians had engaged in round-the-clock street protests and established a makeshift tent camp. The incident apparently started with a police tracer bullet accidentally ricocheted and killed a demonstrator, enraging the protesters to attack the police. The government responded to the melee by declaring a state of emergency in the capital and mobilizing the army to end the mass rallies that had characterized Yerevan since the losing candidates accused President Robert Kocharian of manipulating the results of the Feb. 19 election. They claimed that Kocharian, prevented by the constitution from running for a third term, resorted to buying votes, rigging ballots, and using government resources, such as the state-run media, to support the campaign of his preferred candidate, incumbent Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian.Armenia's central electoral commission declared that Sarkisian won the election outright in the first round with 53 percent of the vote, with former Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosian, the main opposition candidate, receiving only 21.5 percent. Former speaker of the parliament, Artur Baghdasarian, obtained 17.7 percent of the eligible votes.Opposition leaders cited evidence of fraud and demanded annulment of the Feb. 19 results and the holding of another ballot. Since the elections, crowds of demonstrators had assembled in Freedom Square, frequently shouting the slogan "Fight, fight to the end." Ter-Petrosian appeared at several of the protest rallies and, at the end of February, filed a formal complaint with Armenia's constitutional court to overturn the declared results. Several senior government officials, since dismissed, have broken with Kocharian and backed Ter-Petrosian's claim of fraud.On Feb. 29, however, Sarkisian secured the support of third-place finisher Baghdasarian, who agreed to become Security Council secretary in the next government, thereby bolstering its legitimacy. The Council is the president's main advisory body; its leader is considered the third or fourth highest-ranking official in the country.Kocharian charged some protesters with attempting to launch a coup d'état. The president began his declaration of an emergency by announcing that "the self-nominated candidate Levon Ter-Petrosian who lost in the 2008 presidential election in the Republic of Armenia, and a group of adventure-seekers surrounding him, without acknowledging the reality of their defeat, took to illegal actions" by accumulating and transporting weapons and holding public marches without notifying the authorities. The state of emergency, issued by Kocharian and subsequently approved by the National Assembly, will remain in force until March 20. It suspends several constitutional guarantees, such as the right to strike and engage in public demonstrations, and imposes censorship, requiring the local media to report only government-provided information. The decree also endows the internal security forces with enhanced powers to control the movement of people and vehicles. Finally, it temporarily suspends activities of political parties and other nongovernmental organizations. "If participants in the disorder fire at police, I have no choice but to resort to the army's help," Kocharian explained in televised remarks following the clash. "And I am obliged to safeguard the safety of our citizens." Opposition leaders claim that government provocateurs placed firearms and other weapons near sleeping demonstrators in order to justify suppressing the peaceful demonstrations. General Seyran Ohanyan, the chief of the Armenian military staff, warned that the military would respond to any mass gatherings during this period with "very strong counteractions from Armenia's military forces." Saying he hoped to limit further violence, Ter-Petrosian, then briefly under house arrest, called on the demonstrators to end public protests for the duration of the state of emergency. Most people appear to have heeded his appeal, as well as government threats, to stay at home, but scattered looting was reported. The New York Times noted the incongruity of the strong support for Ter-Petroisian among the looters: "'I'm fighting for honesty,' said a man in his 50s, holding a stolen beer in one hand and a lemon in the other."International observers offered varying assessments of the elections. The 333 monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found many local irregularities, especially in the vote counting, but concluded that the process was "mostly" fair and an improvement over earlier ballot. Some world leaders, most notably Russian President Vladimir Putin, have congratulated Sarkisian on winning the election.Most Western governments have withheld formal endorsement, simply congratulating the Armenian people for holding the election. For example, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tom Casey issued a statement saying, "We congratulate the people of Armenia on the active and competitive presidential election," but added that "we also note that international monitors identified significant problems with electoral procedures." The department called on the authorities to rectify these flaws by holding recounts and taking steps to ensure future ballots are conducted better. "We also urge all political forces to continue observing the rule of law and to work peacefully and responsively for a democratic Armenia."The events in Armenia eerily resemble recent developments in Georgia. In early January 2008, Mikheil Saakashvili won a first-round victory in the country's presidential election, garnering 53 percent of the vote, while the second-place finisher received 27 percent. As in Armenia, international electoral observers certified the results despite criticizing instances of intimidation of opposition candidates, procedural shortcomings in ballot counting, and an unwarranted boost to the incumbent from his activities as head of state.The previous November, Saakashvili had imposed a state of emergency that suspended operations of the main opposition Imedi TV station and ordering the police to use force to end the mass rallies that had paralyzed downtown Tbilisi for a week. The protesters, hundreds of whom were injured in the police crackdown, claimed they were trying to defend Georgia's democratic system of government against Saakashvili's attempts to acquire dictatorial powers. The president accused the demonstrators of seeking to overthrow the government, but international human rights groups and some foreign governments criticized Saakashvili's move.Somewhat ironically, a similar mass protest in 1998 compelled Ter-Petrosian, whose reelection in 1996 was also tainted by charges of irregularities, to resign as the country's first freely elected president since Armenia regained independence in 1991. Critics recall his presidency as being marked by the repression of opposition parties and the death of at least one party activist held in police custody. Ter-Petrosian has referred to the protests as a "democratic revolution." Yet, his questionable past makes it difficult to characterize the current situation as another colored revolution such as those that occurred in several former Soviet republics during the 2003-2005 period. Richard Weitz is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a World Politics Review contributing editor.
On March 1, the conflict over the disputed outcome of last month's presidential elections in Armenia turned deadly when riot police and Interior Ministry troops clashed with armed opposition demonstrators in the capital city. Dozens of people were killed or injured in downtown Yerevan, where tens of thousands of Armenians had engaged in round-the-clock street protests and established a makeshift tent camp. The incident apparently started with a police tracer bullet accidentally ricocheted and killed a demonstrator, enraging the protesters to attack the police. The government responded to the melee by declaring a state of emergency in the capital and mobilizing the army to end the mass rallies that had characterized Yerevan since the losing candidates accused President Robert Kocharian of manipulating the results of the Feb. 19 election. They claimed that Kocharian, prevented by the constitution from running for a third term, resorted to buying votes, rigging ballots, and using government resources, such as the state-run media, to support the campaign of his preferred candidate, incumbent Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian.Armenia's central electoral commission declared that Sarkisian won the election outright in the first round with 53 percent of the vote, with former Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosian, the main opposition candidate, receiving only 21.5 percent. Former speaker of the parliament, Artur Baghdasarian, obtained 17.7 percent of the eligible votes.Opposition leaders cited evidence of fraud and demanded annulment of the Feb. 19 results and the holding of another ballot. Since the elections, crowds of demonstrators had assembled in Freedom Square, frequently shouting the slogan "Fight, fight to the end." Ter-Petrosian appeared at several of the protest rallies and, at the end of February, filed a formal complaint with Armenia's constitutional court to overturn the declared results. Several senior government officials, since dismissed, have broken with Kocharian and backed Ter-Petrosian's claim of fraud.On Feb. 29, however, Sarkisian secured the support of third-place finisher Baghdasarian, who agreed to become Security Council secretary in the next government, thereby bolstering its legitimacy. The Council is the president's main advisory body; its leader is considered the third or fourth highest-ranking official in the country.Kocharian charged some protesters with attempting to launch a coup d'état. The president began his declaration of an emergency by announcing that "the self-nominated candidate Levon Ter-Petrosian who lost in the 2008 presidential election in the Republic of Armenia, and a group of adventure-seekers surrounding him, without acknowledging the reality of their defeat, took to illegal actions" by accumulating and transporting weapons and holding public marches without notifying the authorities. The state of emergency, issued by Kocharian and subsequently approved by the National Assembly, will remain in force until March 20. It suspends several constitutional guarantees, such as the right to strike and engage in public demonstrations, and imposes censorship, requiring the local media to report only government-provided information. The decree also endows the internal security forces with enhanced powers to control the movement of people and vehicles. Finally, it temporarily suspends activities of political parties and other nongovernmental organizations. "If participants in the disorder fire at police, I have no choice but to resort to the army's help," Kocharian explained in televised remarks following the clash. "And I am obliged to safeguard the safety of our citizens." Opposition leaders claim that government provocateurs placed firearms and other weapons near sleeping demonstrators in order to justify suppressing the peaceful demonstrations. General Seyran Ohanyan, the chief of the Armenian military staff, warned that the military would respond to any mass gatherings during this period with "very strong counteractions from Armenia's military forces." Saying he hoped to limit further violence, Ter-Petrosian, then briefly under house arrest, called on the demonstrators to end public protests for the duration of the state of emergency. Most people appear to have heeded his appeal, as well as government threats, to stay at home, but scattered looting was reported. The New York Times noted the incongruity of the strong support for Ter-Petroisian among the looters: "'I'm fighting for honesty,' said a man in his 50s, holding a stolen beer in one hand and a lemon in the other."International observers offered varying assessments of the elections. The 333 monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found many local irregularities, especially in the vote counting, but concluded that the process was "mostly" fair and an improvement over earlier ballot. Some world leaders, most notably Russian President Vladimir Putin, have congratulated Sarkisian on winning the election.Most Western governments have withheld formal endorsement, simply congratulating the Armenian people for holding the election. For example, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tom Casey issued a statement saying, "We congratulate the people of Armenia on the active and competitive presidential election," but added that "we also note that international monitors identified significant problems with electoral procedures." The department called on the authorities to rectify these flaws by holding recounts and taking steps to ensure future ballots are conducted better. "We also urge all political forces to continue observing the rule of law and to work peacefully and responsively for a democratic Armenia."The events in Armenia eerily resemble recent developments in Georgia. In early January 2008, Mikheil Saakashvili won a first-round victory in the country's presidential election, garnering 53 percent of the vote, while the second-place finisher received 27 percent. As in Armenia, international electoral observers certified the results despite criticizing instances of intimidation of opposition candidates, procedural shortcomings in ballot counting, and an unwarranted boost to the incumbent from his activities as head of state.The previous November, Saakashvili had imposed a state of emergency that suspended operations of the main opposition Imedi TV station and ordering the police to use force to end the mass rallies that had paralyzed downtown Tbilisi for a week. The protesters, hundreds of whom were injured in the police crackdown, claimed they were trying to defend Georgia's democratic system of government against Saakashvili's attempts to acquire dictatorial powers. The president accused the demonstrators of seeking to overthrow the government, but international human rights groups and some foreign governments criticized Saakashvili's move.Somewhat ironically, a similar mass protest in 1998 compelled Ter-Petrosian, whose reelection in 1996 was also tainted by charges of irregularities, to resign as the country's first freely elected president since Armenia regained independence in 1991. Critics recall his presidency as being marked by the repression of opposition parties and the death of at least one party activist held in police custody. Ter-Petrosian has referred to the protests as a "democratic revolution." Yet, his questionable past makes it difficult to characterize the current situation as another colored revolution such as those that occurred in several former Soviet republics during the 2003-2005 period. Richard Weitz is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a World Politics Review contributing editor.
TOL.cz - Soviet Armenia
by TOL7 March 2008
By muzzling the press and dissenters, the regime in Yerevan fails another test of democracy.
It’s a familiar refrain. The government-run media lavish attention on the heir-apparent and ignore opposition candidates. Public employees are given not-so-subtle reminders before election day of who butters their bread. The political elite dismiss outside criticism. And to no one’s surprise, the anointed successor walks away with the presidency.It sounds like Russia, which held its sham presidential election on Sunday. But it also describes Armenia, a former Soviet republic that still has close ties to Moscow. The difference is that the aftermath of yet another faulty Armenian election was marked by a deadly crackdown on demonstrators and an assault on human rights.Armenians are all too familiar with tragedy and dictatorship. The feisty nation endured invasions, genocide and 70 years of communism imposed on it by outsiders. But the years since independence in 1991 have been marked chiefly by problems of Armenia’s own making. The country is still paying the price for its costly turf war with Azerbaijan in the early 1990s. Its belligerent relationship with Turkey damages its economic potential. And despite huge investments from its well-connected diaspora and do-good aid programs, it is still a nation sabotaged by corrupt, clannish, and sometimes violent politics.
Robert KocharianIt all starts at the top, where President Robert Kocharian is about to hand power to his longtime ally, Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian. In the 19 February presidential contest, the prime minister defeated his main challenger, former President Levon Ter-Petrosian, by a 30-point margin. Ter-Petrosian’s supporters immediately declared the election a fraud and took to the streets.International election monitors reported that hopes for a clean contest were marred by bias in the government media, evidence that public employees were compelled to vote for the ruling Republican Party, and incidents of violence. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported several attacks on campaign workers and the offices of Ter-Petrosian just days before the election. The OSCE said the attacks contributed to “the increasingly tense pre-election environment.” OMINOUS WARNINGIt was an ominous warning of things to come. After days of demonstrations, security forces attacked protesters in central Yerevan last weekend. In the ensuing chaos, as many as eight people were killed and dozens of others – including police officers – were wounded. Human Rights Watch, along with other monitors, called on the government to investigate what several eyewitnesses said was excessive use of force. A glance at the websites of media and bloggers intrepid enough to report the incidents, such as the Armenian investigative journalism site HETQ Online, ArmeniaNow, and TOL’s Armenian Patchwork blog, shows menacing security forces, badly beaten victims, the hulks of burned-out police vehicles, and streets littered with debris.
Kocharian declared a 20-day state of emergency on 1 March, banning the right of assembly and muzzling all but “official information.” In a speech to the nation that harkened back to Soviet crackdowns on dissent, he accused protesters of “illegal activities” and challenging “stability” and “constitutional order.” This week, the Sarkisian-controlled parliament waived immunity from prosecution for four opposition lawmakers accused of fomenting unrest.The government has a duty to maintain order, and in a country like Armenia that is too often given to Wild West politics, it is no easy task. But people in democracies have a right to be informed, to express themselves, to assemble, to complain about their government, and to demonstrate against their public servants. Strong democracies can withstand criticism and dissent, but strong democracies are not built from the top down.TOP HEAVY AND UNACCOUNTABLEArmenia’s constitution – which vests inordinate power at the top – is partly to blame for the country’s current crisis. Its political culture is another. Stephan H. Astourian, who heads the Armenian studies program at the University of California at Berkeley, has described the party system in Armenia as one of “a limited geographic scope, ideological fuzziness, and weak institutionalization. These are essentially personalistic organizations, instruments for the ambitions of a more or less well-known individual and his clientele.”
Serzh SarkisianDonors also contribute to the crisis. They tend to chart Armenia’s economic gains as a sign of overall progress without demanding more accountability. A 2005 report from the U.S. Agency for International Development suggests there isn’t much to show for the millions of dollars Washington pumps into democracy-building and anti-corruption programs each year:“Although Armenia has been independent for almost fifteen years, autocratic mentalities and practices remain embedded. The government is dominated by the executive branch and is without meaningful checks and balances. The judiciary is not independent, and rulings are politically biased. A symbiotic relationship between political and business elites has bred endemic corruption and severely hampers the ability of opposition parties to raise funds or access the electronic media.”The opposition, such as it is, has offered little as an alternative. Ter-Petrosian himself was accused of cronyism during the economic privatizations in the early years of the republic, and of rigging his 1996 re-election as president. Two years later he was forced to cede power to his prime minister, Kocharian, but returned from political obscurity a decade later determined to reclaim his old office. He denies inciting his supporters, but he was back in court this week challenging the official results rather than seeking an end to the crisis.The president’s job would not be easy for any leader in an isolated, bitterly divided society where too much blood has been spilled already. If he is to succeed where Kocharian and Ter-Petrosian both failed, Sarkisian will have to make peace with neighboring nations, heal the domestic wounds, create a public-service ethic, and decentralize his own authority.The president-elect should start by demanding that Kocharian lift the emergency decree and remove the shackles from the media. Times of crisis are when people most need information, not government-imposed silence.
By muzzling the press and dissenters, the regime in Yerevan fails another test of democracy.
It’s a familiar refrain. The government-run media lavish attention on the heir-apparent and ignore opposition candidates. Public employees are given not-so-subtle reminders before election day of who butters their bread. The political elite dismiss outside criticism. And to no one’s surprise, the anointed successor walks away with the presidency.It sounds like Russia, which held its sham presidential election on Sunday. But it also describes Armenia, a former Soviet republic that still has close ties to Moscow. The difference is that the aftermath of yet another faulty Armenian election was marked by a deadly crackdown on demonstrators and an assault on human rights.Armenians are all too familiar with tragedy and dictatorship. The feisty nation endured invasions, genocide and 70 years of communism imposed on it by outsiders. But the years since independence in 1991 have been marked chiefly by problems of Armenia’s own making. The country is still paying the price for its costly turf war with Azerbaijan in the early 1990s. Its belligerent relationship with Turkey damages its economic potential. And despite huge investments from its well-connected diaspora and do-good aid programs, it is still a nation sabotaged by corrupt, clannish, and sometimes violent politics.
Robert KocharianIt all starts at the top, where President Robert Kocharian is about to hand power to his longtime ally, Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian. In the 19 February presidential contest, the prime minister defeated his main challenger, former President Levon Ter-Petrosian, by a 30-point margin. Ter-Petrosian’s supporters immediately declared the election a fraud and took to the streets.International election monitors reported that hopes for a clean contest were marred by bias in the government media, evidence that public employees were compelled to vote for the ruling Republican Party, and incidents of violence. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported several attacks on campaign workers and the offices of Ter-Petrosian just days before the election. The OSCE said the attacks contributed to “the increasingly tense pre-election environment.” OMINOUS WARNINGIt was an ominous warning of things to come. After days of demonstrations, security forces attacked protesters in central Yerevan last weekend. In the ensuing chaos, as many as eight people were killed and dozens of others – including police officers – were wounded. Human Rights Watch, along with other monitors, called on the government to investigate what several eyewitnesses said was excessive use of force. A glance at the websites of media and bloggers intrepid enough to report the incidents, such as the Armenian investigative journalism site HETQ Online, ArmeniaNow, and TOL’s Armenian Patchwork blog, shows menacing security forces, badly beaten victims, the hulks of burned-out police vehicles, and streets littered with debris.
Kocharian declared a 20-day state of emergency on 1 March, banning the right of assembly and muzzling all but “official information.” In a speech to the nation that harkened back to Soviet crackdowns on dissent, he accused protesters of “illegal activities” and challenging “stability” and “constitutional order.” This week, the Sarkisian-controlled parliament waived immunity from prosecution for four opposition lawmakers accused of fomenting unrest.The government has a duty to maintain order, and in a country like Armenia that is too often given to Wild West politics, it is no easy task. But people in democracies have a right to be informed, to express themselves, to assemble, to complain about their government, and to demonstrate against their public servants. Strong democracies can withstand criticism and dissent, but strong democracies are not built from the top down.TOP HEAVY AND UNACCOUNTABLEArmenia’s constitution – which vests inordinate power at the top – is partly to blame for the country’s current crisis. Its political culture is another. Stephan H. Astourian, who heads the Armenian studies program at the University of California at Berkeley, has described the party system in Armenia as one of “a limited geographic scope, ideological fuzziness, and weak institutionalization. These are essentially personalistic organizations, instruments for the ambitions of a more or less well-known individual and his clientele.”
Serzh SarkisianDonors also contribute to the crisis. They tend to chart Armenia’s economic gains as a sign of overall progress without demanding more accountability. A 2005 report from the U.S. Agency for International Development suggests there isn’t much to show for the millions of dollars Washington pumps into democracy-building and anti-corruption programs each year:“Although Armenia has been independent for almost fifteen years, autocratic mentalities and practices remain embedded. The government is dominated by the executive branch and is without meaningful checks and balances. The judiciary is not independent, and rulings are politically biased. A symbiotic relationship between political and business elites has bred endemic corruption and severely hampers the ability of opposition parties to raise funds or access the electronic media.”The opposition, such as it is, has offered little as an alternative. Ter-Petrosian himself was accused of cronyism during the economic privatizations in the early years of the republic, and of rigging his 1996 re-election as president. Two years later he was forced to cede power to his prime minister, Kocharian, but returned from political obscurity a decade later determined to reclaim his old office. He denies inciting his supporters, but he was back in court this week challenging the official results rather than seeking an end to the crisis.The president’s job would not be easy for any leader in an isolated, bitterly divided society where too much blood has been spilled already. If he is to succeed where Kocharian and Ter-Petrosian both failed, Sarkisian will have to make peace with neighboring nations, heal the domestic wounds, create a public-service ethic, and decentralize his own authority.The president-elect should start by demanding that Kocharian lift the emergency decree and remove the shackles from the media. Times of crisis are when people most need information, not government-imposed silence.
Troubling news from the Caucasus - The Economist
Bloodshed in Armenia worries both Russia and the West
THE day after Dmitry Medvedev's presidential victory, Moscow's leading papers turned their attention away from the long-predicted result to the unexpected bloodshed in Armenia. At least eight people were killed in clashes between security forces and opposition supporters protesting against alleged fraud in the country's presidential elections. “An election won with some blood”, ran the headline in Kommersant, a leading business daily.
Small, complicated and with names that are hard to spell, Armenia has long been out of the mainstream of world news. Yet what happens in this country has implications not only for the whole of the Caucasus, a region vital for Europe's energy security, but also for Russia. The story of rigged elections, corrupt officials and dead protesters is particularly unnerving for Russia, a country that prides itself on its stability.
On February 19th Armenia held presidential elections. The incumbent prime minister, Serzh Sarkisian, assisted by a biased media and occasional stuffing of the ballot boxes, won 53% of the vote. If the election had been conducted fairly, there is a good chance he would have faced a second round and a possible defeat. But Mr Sarkisian had the backing of Robert Kocharian, the current president, which swung the result. (Mr Kocharian, it is said, fancies the job of prime minister—not unlike his Russian counterpart.)
International observers did not cover themselves in glory. The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe pointed out many shortcomings, yet said in an initial statement that the ballot was “mostly in line with the country's international commitments”.
The opposition, led by Levon Ter-Petrosian, an academic and Armenia's first president, demanded a re-run of the election. His supporters took to the streets. Mr Ter-Petrosian is no democratic angel. In 1996 he is widely believed to have rigged the presidential election in his favour. Still, those who voted for him this time did so largely in protest against the local mafia, corruption and unemployment now associated with Mr Kocharian.
For 11 days the government put up with the peaceful protest. But on March 1st, the police moved in on the pretext that protesters were carrying firearms, which some observers say were planted. Mr Ter-Petrosian was placed under de facto house arrest and the crowd was dispersed. Predictably it regrouped and gathered in front of the French embassy in Yerevan. Mr Kocharian sent in the army, and the area was soon lit up with tracer fire.
Eight people were killed, cars were torched and shops were looted. Many protesters were armed with stones and metal poles. But the responsibility ultimately lies with the government which allowed the situation to deteriorate into chaos. The state of emergency now imposed by Mr Kocharian for 20 days, including a media blackout and the arrest of opposition figures, may temporarily suppress the protests, but it is unlikely to resolve the underlying problems.
These include corruption, low living standards and an economic blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey because of Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian-populated enclave inside Azerbaijan that was conquered by Armenia in 1994. This conflict has long been frozen. But three days after the violence in Yerevan, Armenian and Azerbaijani forces were involved in their worst firefight in a decade. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan accuse each other of starting the skirmish, which caused a disputed number of deaths on both sides.
Claiming that Kosovo's declaration of independence last month has emboldened Armenian separatists, Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliev, has given warning that he is buying weapons to retake Nagorno-Karabakh by force, if necessary. A renewed war could destabilise the region and jeopardise a strategic oil pipeline to Turkey that runs only 15 kilometres (ten miles) from the ceasefire line.
Nagorno-Karabakh remains an open sore. Mr Ter-Petrosian's downfall in 1998 was mainly caused by his hints of a more flexible approach to a peace settlement with Azerbaijan. Both Mr Kocharian and Mr Sarkisian are from Nagorno-Karabakh and fought in the war, but they have done little to move towards peace. In a recent commentary in the Washington Post, Mr Ter-Petrosian dismissed the notion that only hardliners from Nagorno-Karabakh can solve the conflict. Indeed, he argues that Mr Sarkisian, whose presidency is now marred by bloodshed and incompetence, will be even less able to govern.
Russia and the West have an interest in Armenia's stability, and they need to work to maintain it. This could be Mr Medvedev's first foreign test as president.
THE day after Dmitry Medvedev's presidential victory, Moscow's leading papers turned their attention away from the long-predicted result to the unexpected bloodshed in Armenia. At least eight people were killed in clashes between security forces and opposition supporters protesting against alleged fraud in the country's presidential elections. “An election won with some blood”, ran the headline in Kommersant, a leading business daily.
Small, complicated and with names that are hard to spell, Armenia has long been out of the mainstream of world news. Yet what happens in this country has implications not only for the whole of the Caucasus, a region vital for Europe's energy security, but also for Russia. The story of rigged elections, corrupt officials and dead protesters is particularly unnerving for Russia, a country that prides itself on its stability.
On February 19th Armenia held presidential elections. The incumbent prime minister, Serzh Sarkisian, assisted by a biased media and occasional stuffing of the ballot boxes, won 53% of the vote. If the election had been conducted fairly, there is a good chance he would have faced a second round and a possible defeat. But Mr Sarkisian had the backing of Robert Kocharian, the current president, which swung the result. (Mr Kocharian, it is said, fancies the job of prime minister—not unlike his Russian counterpart.)
International observers did not cover themselves in glory. The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe pointed out many shortcomings, yet said in an initial statement that the ballot was “mostly in line with the country's international commitments”.
The opposition, led by Levon Ter-Petrosian, an academic and Armenia's first president, demanded a re-run of the election. His supporters took to the streets. Mr Ter-Petrosian is no democratic angel. In 1996 he is widely believed to have rigged the presidential election in his favour. Still, those who voted for him this time did so largely in protest against the local mafia, corruption and unemployment now associated with Mr Kocharian.
For 11 days the government put up with the peaceful protest. But on March 1st, the police moved in on the pretext that protesters were carrying firearms, which some observers say were planted. Mr Ter-Petrosian was placed under de facto house arrest and the crowd was dispersed. Predictably it regrouped and gathered in front of the French embassy in Yerevan. Mr Kocharian sent in the army, and the area was soon lit up with tracer fire.
Eight people were killed, cars were torched and shops were looted. Many protesters were armed with stones and metal poles. But the responsibility ultimately lies with the government which allowed the situation to deteriorate into chaos. The state of emergency now imposed by Mr Kocharian for 20 days, including a media blackout and the arrest of opposition figures, may temporarily suppress the protests, but it is unlikely to resolve the underlying problems.
These include corruption, low living standards and an economic blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey because of Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian-populated enclave inside Azerbaijan that was conquered by Armenia in 1994. This conflict has long been frozen. But three days after the violence in Yerevan, Armenian and Azerbaijani forces were involved in their worst firefight in a decade. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan accuse each other of starting the skirmish, which caused a disputed number of deaths on both sides.
Claiming that Kosovo's declaration of independence last month has emboldened Armenian separatists, Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliev, has given warning that he is buying weapons to retake Nagorno-Karabakh by force, if necessary. A renewed war could destabilise the region and jeopardise a strategic oil pipeline to Turkey that runs only 15 kilometres (ten miles) from the ceasefire line.
Nagorno-Karabakh remains an open sore. Mr Ter-Petrosian's downfall in 1998 was mainly caused by his hints of a more flexible approach to a peace settlement with Azerbaijan. Both Mr Kocharian and Mr Sarkisian are from Nagorno-Karabakh and fought in the war, but they have done little to move towards peace. In a recent commentary in the Washington Post, Mr Ter-Petrosian dismissed the notion that only hardliners from Nagorno-Karabakh can solve the conflict. Indeed, he argues that Mr Sarkisian, whose presidency is now marred by bloodshed and incompetence, will be even less able to govern.
Russia and the West have an interest in Armenia's stability, and they need to work to maintain it. This could be Mr Medvedev's first foreign test as president.
Подписаться на:
Сообщения (Atom)