Press Review
(Saturday, May 22)
Armenian newspapers continue to react to the European Parliament’s recent resolution on the South Caucasus that calls for the “withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied territories of Azerbaijan.”
“168 Zham” sees a ‘real panic’ among Armenian government leaders caused by the passage of that resolution. “Needless to say what negative consequences the resolution adopted at such a high level may have – beginning from the European Union’s laying claim to a mandate in dealing with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and ending with the expression of a common European foreign policy stand on the conflict settlement. In short, the authorities, indeed, have a reason to be panicking.”
On the same subject, “Zhamanak” writes that a similar [Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe] resolution in 2005 was even tougher on Armenia and that the current one is a ‘blessing’ compared to that one.
Still, the paper adds: “The matter, however, is what the Republic of Armenia has done as a state to prevent the appearance or repetition of such resolutions, their movement from one international body to another. What do the authorities of Armenia do besides calling the authors of such resolutions ‘executors of the will of Azerbaijani or Turkish lobbying groups’?”
“Aravot” sees the adoption of such a resolution by the European Parliament as another proof that the Armenian authorities have failed to take any serious steps to end the ‘vulnerable situation’ in which Armenia found itself after the 2008 post-election crisis.
“First of all, I mean the issue of political prisoners,” writes the daily’s editor. “If we read the resolution in full and not only the part concerning Nagorno-Karabakh, we shall see quite correct and fair assessments regarding Armenia’s internal political life. It now appears that our adversaries have made the best use of our internal problems for their own purposes. In short, the resolution would not have been adopted if we didn’t have political prisoners, if those responsible for the March 1, 2008 killings had been punished, if [independent TV channel] A1+ were on the air now.”
“Chorrord Inknishkhanutyun” scoffs at the arguments that the European Parliament’s resolution had a ‘bribed pro-Azerbaijani’ author or that it is a ‘nonbinding resolution’.
“When somebody spits in your face, it doesn’t cause particularly serious traumas either. But does that mean we shouldn’t look for the causes of this ‘phenomenon’?” asks the paper tartly.
“Haykakan Zhamanak” quotes the press service of the Yerevan Brandy Company as explaining that the recent government decision on a new market name for Armenian brandies, Arbun, does not concern brandies produced the basis of locally procured raw materials. The company says there is “a misunderstanding among the public regarding that decision.”
“The thing is that under the Armenian law on alcoholic beverages based on grape raw materials the government is empowered to define the name only for brandies produced with imported raw materials. In other words, only brandies produced with imported raw materials will be called ‘Arbun’, and the brandies produced on the basis of grapes grown in Armenia will continue to be called Armenian brandy,” it says.
(Tigran Avetisian)
(Saturday, May 22)
Armenian newspapers continue to react to the European Parliament’s recent resolution on the South Caucasus that calls for the “withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied territories of Azerbaijan.”
“168 Zham” sees a ‘real panic’ among Armenian government leaders caused by the passage of that resolution. “Needless to say what negative consequences the resolution adopted at such a high level may have – beginning from the European Union’s laying claim to a mandate in dealing with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and ending with the expression of a common European foreign policy stand on the conflict settlement. In short, the authorities, indeed, have a reason to be panicking.”
On the same subject, “Zhamanak” writes that a similar [Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe] resolution in 2005 was even tougher on Armenia and that the current one is a ‘blessing’ compared to that one.
Still, the paper adds: “The matter, however, is what the Republic of Armenia has done as a state to prevent the appearance or repetition of such resolutions, their movement from one international body to another. What do the authorities of Armenia do besides calling the authors of such resolutions ‘executors of the will of Azerbaijani or Turkish lobbying groups’?”
“Aravot” sees the adoption of such a resolution by the European Parliament as another proof that the Armenian authorities have failed to take any serious steps to end the ‘vulnerable situation’ in which Armenia found itself after the 2008 post-election crisis.
“First of all, I mean the issue of political prisoners,” writes the daily’s editor. “If we read the resolution in full and not only the part concerning Nagorno-Karabakh, we shall see quite correct and fair assessments regarding Armenia’s internal political life. It now appears that our adversaries have made the best use of our internal problems for their own purposes. In short, the resolution would not have been adopted if we didn’t have political prisoners, if those responsible for the March 1, 2008 killings had been punished, if [independent TV channel] A1+ were on the air now.”
“Chorrord Inknishkhanutyun” scoffs at the arguments that the European Parliament’s resolution had a ‘bribed pro-Azerbaijani’ author or that it is a ‘nonbinding resolution’.
“When somebody spits in your face, it doesn’t cause particularly serious traumas either. But does that mean we shouldn’t look for the causes of this ‘phenomenon’?” asks the paper tartly.
“Haykakan Zhamanak” quotes the press service of the Yerevan Brandy Company as explaining that the recent government decision on a new market name for Armenian brandies, Arbun, does not concern brandies produced the basis of locally procured raw materials. The company says there is “a misunderstanding among the public regarding that decision.”
“The thing is that under the Armenian law on alcoholic beverages based on grape raw materials the government is empowered to define the name only for brandies produced with imported raw materials. In other words, only brandies produced with imported raw materials will be called ‘Arbun’, and the brandies produced on the basis of grapes grown in Armenia will continue to be called Armenian brandy,” it says.
(Tigran Avetisian)