Armenia and the information war

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

Indeed that is what is happening except in the case of this specific Russian company, I am not sure if it offers tours in Azerbaijan as well given how there is no indication in the article. It is only stating that the Azerbaijani embassy in Russia started barking and it eventually gave in under the pretext of "danger to Russian citizens" (is that a threat to Russia's citizens by Azerbaijan? Where art thou, Mother Bear?!). Though it could possibly want to enter the Azerbaijan market in the future but I don't see how they'd just stop these tours without a guaranteed penetration there.

BTW bell, very interesting info on Cuba. I did not know that the USA was that aggressive with the UK on Cuba. I find it interesting because Canadians seem to have no problem getting insurance and going to Cuba and they maintain great relations with the island.

I was presuming they also did tours to Azerbaijan, or maybe used Azerbaijan for transit purposes. And, since they are in it as a business they can't really be blamed for looking at the bottom line, where they make the most money. But if they don't go to Azerbaijan at all, then there isn't a reason for them to withdraw from NK as a destination.

Most of the banks in Britain that sell travel insurance have a "not available to Cuba" clause for their tourist-marketed travel insurance. They don't say the reason of course, but it is because of US sanctions against Cuba and the risk of a UK/EU-based company that also has branches in America being subject to prosecuton in America. Cuba is quite popular here as a holiday destination btw.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

You miss the entire point of what I said. I do agree, and repeat, that Samurai today are not the same as they used to be, or rather, they don't serve the same purpose. But the way of life of the ancient Samurai, including its teachings and techniques, have persisted in some individuals, in a modernized fashion, in the Japanese society of today. The truth is, they are the successors of ancient samurai, just like Kung-Fu students are modern successors of ancient Kung-Fu. I don't deny the Khachkars today are not exactly what Khachkars were back in ancient times, nor do they serve the exact same purpose. Maybe if I incorporate linguistics in my analogy you can understand better: We can say that French is a dialect of Latin that developed so much in the past centuries, it became its own language. It's still a form of Latin, but it is not Latin in the strict sense of the language spoken during the Roman Empire.

Cultural traditions evolve in the same way. True, we can't equate modern Khachkars with the old khachkars 100%. However, Khachkars are still produced in Armenia (and Armenia alone), using various materials (as opposed to solely stone like in ancient times) for purely artistic or traditional purposes, and doesn't necessarily have the same meaning it used to (religious rituals); much like a Native American will make a dreamcatcher for artistic purposes, without really believing that it actually "catches dreams." It simply becomes a form of art that acts as a basis for the identity of that person. Your attempt to associate modern "khachkars" with real khachkars degrades and denegrades those real khachkars (a degredation and denegration that is revealed in a wider way in Armenia today through the destruction and removal of genuine khachkars to make way for the vast grave plots that modern Armenians want) .


Additionally, Khachkars are known to tell stories through symbolism of abstract art, and there are still many people who know these techniques, and apply them on their wooden khachkars.

Finally, I wonder if you even viewed the video that Yedtarts posted. If I'm not mistaken, they show modern stone khachkars, made by a certain individual called Babik Vartanian. How can you call these magnificent pieces of art "modern atrocities," "ugly pastiches" or "lifeless copies"? How can you pretend that these masterpieces have nothing to do with ancient khachkars? Truth is, if ancient khachkars didn't exist, these wouldn't. So the only conclusion we can make from this is that the former ritualistic form of art that is khachkar has derived/evolved to this unique form of art we see today in Armenia. You can't degrade the unique art of khachkar-making to the level of ancient-wannabe Stonehenge druids.

You denigrate Armenians and Armenian culture because it is clear as day that you think we Armenians are stuck up and arrogant, and you do this by giving yourself an overly liberal "I'm not afraid to say the truth that hurts" image among the (according to you) closed-minded, arrogant crowd -- but that's not the right way. Although I commend some of your open-minded comments, and I agree that many Armenians are closed-minded, sometimes you go too far and pretend that your mindsets are the only objective truths, and that if we don't agree, we are being arrogant or "too proud." Although we both agree on the point the khachkar-making has changed, I don't agree with your stance that khachkar-making is extinct.



Clearly you need to rethink the stereotypes you have set in your mind, because I don't even have a single one of those things in my room, nor anywhere in my house. I make fun of my friends who do But I do respect, and am fascinated by Japanese/East Asian culture (which is why I thought of the Samurai analogy among the other analogies I could have used).

And you have been entirely missing my point. This UNESCO "Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage" list is about traditional cultural practices that are under risk. However good I think it would be, there is probably no risk that the carvers of today's ugly pastiches are about to cease their productions and go out of business. This modern carving of khachkars is not a traditional cultural practice because the real tradition of khachkar carving had completely died out by the start of the 19th century, and had started to die out by the 17th century. The few that were carved after that date were nothing more than imitations of existing khachkars and were created for non-traditional purposes. Meanwhile, most of the functions formerly filled by khachkars were continued by other forms of grave markers. The UNESCO claim that " Khachkar craftsmanship is transmitted through families or from master to apprentice" is false - these modern so-called khachkars were not being carved a generation ago so there can have been no such transmission. The Soviet-period production of mini souvenir khachkars in stone or wood is not a genuine expression of "Intangible Cultural Heritage" - or are the Egyptians still a nation of pyramid builders because we can buy little plastic pyramids in countless Cairo souvenir shops?

BTW, traditional khachars are not abstract art - just because most people today do not understand or cannot read their imagery does not mean their meaning is abstract. However, the fact that their meaning IS often no longer clearly understood (and if their imagery is understood, the story and belief-system they reveal is no longer believable) is another reason why these modern creations do not count as examples of "Intangible Cultural Heritage" production as UNESCO defines it. For example, since nobody can now believe that the Earth and mankind is only 6000 years old - the imagery of the skull of Adam underneath the cross cannot be comprehended in the same way as those who carved and used real medieval khachkars.

Connecting these modern, value-free, pastiche productions with original khachkars is what will "degrade the unique art of khachkar-making": it devalues real khachkars. I think this devaluing is revealed in Armenia on a wider scale through the destruction or removal of real khachkars to make way for the vast and tasteless grave plots that today's wealthy Armenians seem to want. Placing a modern "khachkar" at the head of those sort of graves is no better than placing there a big shiny granite slab with a kitchy photo etched onto it.

[Yedtarts]

Re: Armenia and the information war

Yeah UNESCO the expert in khachkars , they pretended that they didn’t know the location of thousands of very unique khachkars in Nakhichevan, and has done nothing and willing to do nothing when barbarians destroyed a very unique heritage not just to Armenians but to the entire civilized world. Now they come and pretend to be experts how the khachkar craftsmanship was transmitted? F UNESCO!!!!

[Mos]

Re: Armenia and the information war

interesting...

Court of Berlin fined Azerbaijani nationalist for insulting President Serzh Sargsyan

A court of Berlin charged Azerbaijani Gabib Abdulayev who lives in Germany 900 euros for making offensive statements towards President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan.

According to “Media Forum”Abdulayev was arrested on June 22, 2010 for crying anti-Armenian slogans during President Sargsyan’s visit to Germany.

Abdulayev declared he didn’t think he was guilty and wouldn’t pay the penalty. Thus he violates the country’s legislation where he is an ordinary immigrant.

It’s said that Abdulayev spread anti-Armenian and nationalist statements through different social networks, including “Facebook”.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenia and the information war

Was Georgia's Victory at the NATO Summit Armenia's Loss?
November 24, 2010 - 12:54pm, by Joshua Kucera
The Bug Pit Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia NATO
So what was behind Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan's decision to skip the NATO summit last weekend in Lisbon? The president's office said it was in protest of the language of the NATO joint communique, which emphasizes the principle of territorial integrity in resolving the conflicts of the South Caucasus, which would favor Azerbaijan's position in the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh.

But that language was the same as in the communique issued after the 2008 NATO summit. So why protest now?

I asked Emil Sanamyan, editor of the Armenian Reporter newspaper, and he pointed out that in May, Sargsyan went to NATO and asked them to follow the OSCE's three principles in Nagorno Karabakh, which include people's right to self-determination as well as territorial integrity and non-use of force. (Self-determination is the principle that favors the Armenian side, since Karabakh's population is Armenian, while nominally it remains part of Azerbaijani territory.) From Sargsyan's press conference at NATO:

During the meeting I also emphasized the need and importance for a balanced approach by NATO to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh process. I expressed hope that future statements about NATO and documents of NATO on the Nagorno-Karabakh will be in keeping with the ministerial statement of the OSCE issued in December 2009, which evenly represents all three of the key underlying principles.

In light of those remarks, Samanyan suggested several possible motives behind Sargsyan's refusal to go to the summit:

If you take reasons provided at face value it is possible that Armenia from now on will take a tougher line on any perceived endorsement of Azerbaijan's claims on Nagorno Karabakh.

Sargsyan in general has been criticized for going to meetings for sake of meetings, be that with Turkey or Azerbaijan or others, sacrificing interests for process. Perhaps with this he is trying to disprove that.

More specifically Armenia may have asked NATO to alter the communique language and they didn't.

I also asked Tevan Poghosyan, an analyst in Yerevan, for his thoughts, and he agreed with Sanamyan's last point. He says Sargsyan believed he had a "preliminary agreement" with NATO to change the language of the communique to include the principle of self-determination, and when he found out that NATO had apparently reneged, he backed out. Poghosyan says that NATO's recalcitrance was a sop to Georgia. (You wouldn't think Georgia has that much sway in NATO, but Armenia has even less.) Given that membership with Georgia is off the table and NATO is renewing its relationship with Russia, Poghosyan says, NATO needed to throw them a bone, and it was keeping "territorial integrity." (That principle, obviously, favors Georgia in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.)

Meanwhile, like Georgia, Azerbaijan is claiming the language of the communique as a victory. Via BBC Monitoring:

The declaration adopted at the NATO summit confirms that Armenia is an aggressor country, Mubariz Qurbanli, deputy executive secretary of the [Azerbaijani governing] New Azerbaijan Party, has said in an interview with the website of the party.

The NATO summit held in Lisbon on 19-20 November once again endorsed the point of the adopted declaration which reflects the position of the countries of the alliance which support Azerbaijan's territorial integrity in the context of the conflict settlement...

"The emphasis on support for Azerbaijan's territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty in the declaration adopted at the NATO summit in Lisbon is very important. In principle, the adoption of this document is an open address to the circles who encroached upon the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and confirms that Armenia is an aggressor country," Qurbanli said.

UPDATE: Sanamyan also pointed out one news story that suggests that, in spite of all this, tensions must not have been too high between the Armenian and NATO delegations at the summit:

The Portuguese tabloid, Correio da Manha, reported on November 23, that the Georgian delegation, joined by some officials from the Armenian delegation, hired 80 prostitutes for a party in a hotel where they were staying during the NATO summit on November 19-20.

Emphasis added. All officials deny the story. But if it's true, I guess the lesson is, there is no conflict that a little Caucasian hospitality can't smooth over?

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/62441

[Mos]

Re: Armenia and the information war

We could really use their help, hopefully Turkish-Israeli relations will get more worse....

Dynamics observed in relations of Armenian, xxxish lobbies in U.S.
November 24, 2010 - 19:32 AMT 15:32 GMT

PanARMENIAN.Net - Turkologist, Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the RA National Academy of Sciences Ruben Safrastyan said that on the background of tense relations between Israel and Turkey a certain dynamics is observed in the relations of the Armenian and xxxish lobbies in the U.S.

“The contacts between the Armenian and xxxish organizations of America have rather intensified recently. New trends are outlined in their relations,” Turkologist Ruben Safrastyan told a round table on Trends in Israel-Turkey Relations and the Regional Context.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenia and the information war

AZERBAIJAN PREVENTED INCLUSION OF ALBAN CROSSES INTO UNESCO'S INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE LIST AS EXAMPLES OF ARMENIAN ART

Today

http://www.today.az/news/society/77132.html

Nov 24 2010
Azerbaijan

"One of the issues discussed at the session of the UNESCO's
Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible
Cultural Heritage in Kenya was the inclusion of cross stones offered
by Armenia into the list of intangible heritage," Minister of Culture
and Tourism Abulfas Garayev, who returned from Kenya, said.

Minister noted that the Azerbaijani side was concerned that the Alban
crosses on the historical monuments in Azerbaijan could be included
into the list as examples of Armenian art.

"Our people know very well that the crosses on the historical
monuments in Azerbaijan belong to the Alban people. We were
concerned that these examples might be included into the list under
the name of Armenia. Therefore, UNESCO general secretariat, members
of the commission approached this issue with sensitivity taking into
account the serious objections of Baku scientific society, educational
institutions, Azerbaijani Diaspora, state bodies. As a result of the
two-day serious discussions, the relevant examples were included into
the list under other name - as a kind of art belonging to Armenians.

The possibilities on inclusion of Alban cross stones into the list
were completely eliminated. No one can have claim for Alban cross
stones any more," he said.

According to the Minister, the Armenian side did not object to it,
agreed to the proposals.

"The Armenian side understood that politics can not be linked to
the activity of this commission and agreed to remove the articles
that may concern other issues related to Azerbaijan. After that the
commission gave positive opinion on this proposal. I think we should
promote Alban-era monuments more seriously," he said.

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg349117.html

can someone explain this to me? didnt UNESCO already say khachkars are Armenian?

[SevSpitak]

Re: Armenia and the information war

And you have been entirely missing my point. This UNESCO "Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage" list is about traditional cultural practices that are under risk. However good I think it would be, there is probably no risk that the carvers of today's ugly pastiches are about to cease their productions and go out of business. This modern carving of khachkars is not a traditional cultural practice because the real tradition of khachkar carving had completely died out by the start of the 19th century, and had started to die out by the 17th century. The few that were carved after that date were nothing more than imitations of existing khachkars and were created for non-traditional purposes. Meanwhile, most of the functions formerly filled by khachkars were continued by other forms of grave markers. The UNESCO claim that " Khachkar craftsmanship is transmitted through families or from master to apprentice" is false - these modern so-called khachkars were not being carved a generation ago so there can have been no such transmission. The Soviet-period production of mini souvenir khachkars in stone or wood is not a genuine expression of "Intangible Cultural Heritage" - or are the Egyptians still a nation of pyramid builders because we can buy little plastic pyramids in countless Cairo souvenir shops?

BTW, traditional khachars are not abstract art - just because most people today do not understand or cannot read their imagery does not mean their meaning is abstract. However, the fact that their meaning IS often no longer clearly understood (and if their imagery is understood, the story and belief-system they reveal is no longer believable) is another reason why these modern creations do not count as examples of "Intangible Cultural Heritage" production as UNESCO defines it. For example, since nobody can now believe that the Earth and mankind is only 6000 years old - the imagery of the skull of Adam underneath the cross cannot be comprehended in the same way as those who carved and used real medieval khachkars.

Connecting these modern, value-free, pastiche productions with original khachkars is what will "degrade the unique art of khachkar-making": it devalues real khachkars. I think this devaluing is revealed in Armenia on a wider scale through the destruction or removal of real khachkars to make way for the vast and tasteless grave plots that today's wealthy Armenians seem to want. Placing a modern "khachkar" at the head of those sort of graves is no better than placing there a big shiny granite slab with a kitchy photo etched onto it.

You can't compare khachkars to pyramids, because pyramids are basic forms that don't require imagination nor artistic skills. Khachkars require skill and the understanding of the various traditional design patterns and styles. Even the small, cheap wooden khachkars require hours of work and knowledge on its unique form of art, which makes them far more valuable than just cheap, metal pyramid keychains sold for a buck or two at your local Egyptian souvenir shop.

Also, I never mentioned UNESCO. I couldn't care less what UNESCO thinks or does, because clearly, it failed to do anything in Julfa or Ani, and it fails to this day to be realistic (as ninetoyadome's last post suggests). I argued with your point that khachkar making is extinct (the same way pyramid making or greek/roman temple making is extinct).

When I said "abstract art," I meant abstract forms that hold meanings (in other words, exactly what you just said). I don't mean it in the sense of Picasso's art, where it's complete gibberish. Also, there are people who know and study what Khachkars symbolized. Simply because you decided that connecting modern khachkars to ancient ones will "degrade" them, it doesn't make it so.

In any case, I don't think we'll ever come on an understanding on this because you insist that if an Armenian makes a khachkar today, it's a fake, and I insist that it's a modern rendition. Many Armenians will agree with your standpoint, and many will agree with mine, so I think this is a question of how we view culture. I am curious, though. Do you also consider the new churches built in Armenia as "fakes"? (like this one)

Whatever, this discussion is irrelevant to this thread, so if you want to discuss it more, I suggest we start a new topic on this, and ask Federate to transfer our posts there.

[SevSpitak]

Re: Armenia and the information war

'NATO summit declaration means of pressure on Armenia'

Presidential official Novruz Mammadov stressed the importance to support the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan by NATO.
'The NATO summit in Lisbon is a very important international event since today NATO is one of the strongest military and political structures on the plant, uniting such a superpower as the United States and the leading European countries.

The declaration adopted on this summit on the support to the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is naturally the success of our country', chief of department for international relations of the presidential administration Novruz Mammadov told the website of the ruling New Azerbaijan party.

He said, on the one hand, the summit declaration is the success of Azerbaijani diplomacy and on the other hand, it is the means of pressure on Armenia.

'The adopted declaration is also the success of the activity of our president who attaches a great importance to the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh conflict within the framework of the territorial integrity of our country through negotiations and this position of NATO is a logical result of the policy of our president and the state', Mammadov said.

Mammadov said the foreign policy of the country is the sphere where the results of any step cannot be seen in short terms.

'They can be seen in 3,5,10 and sometimes even 20 years. Therefore, the wrong steps of Armenia will be obvious in some time', he said.

According to Mammadov, the Armenian leadership and Armenian people should realize that they lived at Azerbaijan’s expense in the USSR period.

Original Article, News.az

--------------------------

2 of NATO member and MG co-chairing states approve settlement of NK conflict based three principles

Lisbon hosted NATO summit final declaration’s 35th paragraph defines “We remain committed in our support of the territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and the Republic of Moldova, and will also continue to support efforts towards a peaceful settlement of these regional conflicts, taking into account these principles.”

Armenian Public Radio news program “Radiolur” requested official remarks from Embassies of United States and of France to Armenia, both are co-chairing states to OSCE Minsk Group, and at the same time they are NATO member states, about NK conflict resolution.

Embassy of the United States of America to Armenia sent official response which reads: “The United States remains committed to the peaceful and long-lasting settlement of the conflict through the Minsk Group process on the basis of the three principles of the Helsinki Final Act – non-use of force or the threat of force, territorial integrity and the right of peoples to self-determination, which were further consolidated in the joint statements of Presidents Obama, Sarkozy and Medvedev issued in L’Aquila in 2009 and Muskoka in 2010,” the US Embassy stated in its official response.”

“As a co-chairing country of the OSCE Minsk Group, France remains committed to the negotiated settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict based on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, non-use of force or the threat of force, territorial integrity and the right of peoples to self-determination, as well as on the elements included in the L’Aquila and Muskoka statements of Presidents Sarkozy, Medvedev and Obama,” the French Embassy stated in its official response.

Original Article, Panorama.am

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

AZERBAIJAN PREVENTED INCLUSION OF ALBAN CROSSES INTO UNESCO'S INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE LIST AS EXAMPLES OF ARMENIAN ART

Today

http://www.today.az/news/society/77132.html

Nov 24 2010
Azerbaijan

"One of the issues discussed at the session of the UNESCO's
Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible
Cultural Heritage in Kenya was the inclusion of cross stones offered
by Armenia into the list of intangible heritage," Minister of Culture
and Tourism Abulfas Garayev, who returned from Kenya, said.

Minister noted that the Azerbaijani side was concerned that the Alban
crosses on the historical monuments in Azerbaijan could be included
into the list as examples of Armenian art.

"Our people know very well that the crosses on the historical
monuments in Azerbaijan belong to the Alban people. We were
concerned that these examples might be included into the list under
the name of Armenia. Therefore, UNESCO general secretariat, members
of the commission approached this issue with sensitivity taking into
account the serious objections of Baku scientific society, educational
institutions, Azerbaijani Diaspora, state bodies. As a result of the
two-day serious discussions, the relevant examples were included into
the list under other name - as a kind of art belonging to Armenians.

The possibilities on inclusion of Alban cross stones into the list
were completely eliminated. No one can have claim for Alban cross
stones any more," he said.

According to the Minister, the Armenian side did not object to it,
agreed to the proposals.

"The Armenian side understood that politics can not be linked to
the activity of this commission and agreed to remove the articles
that may concern other issues related to Azerbaijan. After that the
commission gave positive opinion on this proposal. I think we should
promote Alban-era monuments more seriously," he said.

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg349117.html

can someone explain this to me? didnt UNESCO already say khachkars are Armenian?

It's Azeri gibberish, and doublethink . They are actually claiming that since UNESCO didn't mention "Alban cross stones" and only mentioned Armenian khatchkars, that means that Armenians have been defeated in their attempts to claim "Alban cross stones" as being examples of Armenian khachkars!

Anyway, since there are no living "Albans" around to carve "Alban" crosses (even if there were such a thing as "Alban cross stones" - which there isn't) they could not be included into UNESCO's list of examples of intangible heritage. It's not a case of "the inclusion of cross stones offered by Armenia into the list of intangible heritage" it's "the inclusion of the carving of cross stones in Armenia offered by Armenia into the list of examples of intangible heritage."