DOCSLIB.ORG

Armenia After the Election Hearing Commission On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Armenia After the Election Hearing Commission On ARMENIA AFTER THE ELECTION HEARING BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION APRIL 17, 2008 Printed for the use of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe [CSCE 110–2–8] ( Available via http://www.csce.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 63–747 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS HOUSE SENATE ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida, BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, Chairman Co-Chairman LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER, RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin New York CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York HILDA L. SOLIS, California JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey GORDON SMITH, Oregon ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania RICHARD BURR, North Carolina MIKE PENCE, Indiana EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS David J. Kramer, Department of State VACANT, Department of Defense David Bohigian, Department of Commerce (II) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0486 Sfmt 0486 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD ARMENIA AFTER THE ELECTION APRIL 17, 2008 COMMISSIONERS Page Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 1 Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, Co-Chairman, Commission on Se- curity and Cooperation in Europe .......................................... 14 Hon. Christopher H. Smith, Ranking Member, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe ................................. 2 Hon. David J. Kramer, Executive Branch Commissioner, De- partment of State .................................................................... 4 WITNESSES Hon. Matthew Bryza, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs ........................................ 5 Vigen Sargsyan, Assistant to the President of the Republic of Armenia ................................................................................ 22 Arman Grigorian, spokesman for former President Levon Ter-Petrossian .......................................................................... 26 APPENDICES Prepared statement of Hon. Alcee L. Hastings ........................ 33 Prepared statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin .................... 35 Prepared statement of Hon. Matthew Bryza ............................ 36 Prepared statement of Arman Grigorian .................................. 40 Written material submitted for the record by the Govern- ment of the Republic of Armenia ........................................... 47 (III) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 0484 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 0484 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD ARMENIA AFTER THE ELECTION April 17, 2008 COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE WASHINGTON, DC The hearing was held at 2 p.m. in room B–318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, presiding. Commissioners present: Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Com- mission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, Co-Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; Hon. Christopher H. Smith, Ranking Member, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; and Hon. David J. Kramer, Executive Branch Commissioner, Department of State. Witnesses present: Matthew Bryza, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs; Vigen Sargsyan, Assist- ant to the President of the Republic of Armenia; and Arman Grigorian, spokesman for former President Levon Ter-Petrossian. HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE [Joined in progress.] Mr. HASTINGS [continuing]. A contest, which will be coming up soon. Sorry, young lady. As everyone here knows, the emergence last year into the polit- ical arena of former President Levon Petrossian energized what seemed like a quiet campaign with a predictable outcome. The un- usual circumstances of his departure from office in 1998 undoubt- edly help produce the heated rhetoric that followed his entry into the race. Ultimately, according to official tallies, Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan won the February 19th election with almost 53 percent of the vote. Levon Ter-Petrossian got about 21 percent, the two other leading politicians, who campaigned as opposition candidates, winning over 16 and 6 percent, respectively. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s obser- vation mission noted the need for further improvements, but con- cluded that the election had by and large met international stand- ards. Nevertheless, Mr. Petrossian and his supporters charged fraud and organized an ongoing demonstration in Yerevan. The protests continued for days, attracting considerable crowds, until March 1st, (1) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD 2 and at that point, according to the authorities, some of the dem- onstrators sought to stage a coup d’etat, and law enforcement agen- cies had to restore order by force. In the ensuing state of emergency, independent media were shut down, and rallies were banned. The demonstrators, for their part, reject official allegations of violent intentions or actions. They ac- cuse the authorities of brutally attacking a peaceful assembly pro- testing the theft of the people’s will. Wherever the truth lies, the confrontation resulted in at least eight fatalities and many injuries. That was most regrettable. I understand that in the last few days two more people have died. Allow me to express my condolences to all the victims’ fami- lies. The OSCE Chairman-in-Office condemned the violent crackdown. Other international organizations and foreign capitals followed suit, forcing Yerevan to defend itself to the skeptical international community. Subsequently, two prominent opposition candidates reached agreement with Mr. Sargsyan to join forces. The four parties in this coalition represent, according to the figures provided by the central election commission, about 75 percent of the electorate. Nevertheless, tensions remain high. The state of emergency was officially lifted on March 21st, but restrictions on freedom of assem- bly continue in effect, drawing criticism from the Council of Europe and the OSCE. And while Mr. Sargsyan has been sworn in, some opposition leaders refuse to recognize the election’s outcome. About 100 people imprisoned after March 1st are still in jail. Per- haps most important, Armenian society seems to be split into pro- government and fervently anti-government camps. This chain of events has caused serious damage to Armenia’s reputation. The purpose of our hearing is to examine the ramifica- tions of these developments for Armenia and the United States. What should we conclude about the credibility of the official elec- tion results? In that connection, what can we say about the state of democracy in Armenia? And how can we in Congress and the ex- ecutive branch help Armenia overcome the obvious problems it is encountering on its path to democracy? Of special interest are the implications for the ongoing OSCE ne- gotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia’s qualifications for U.S. assistance from the millennium challenge account. Our three witnesses today, representing the U.S. Government, the Armenian Government and the Armenian opposition, will give us critical perspectives on these issues. But now, I’d like to turn to my colleagues for any remarks they may have, and I’ll start with the Ranking Member, who just came in, my friend, Mr. Smith, from New Jersey. HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, RANKING MEMBER, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE Mr. SMITH. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for calling this very timely hearing, especially as things continue to unfold in Armenia. As someone who has long been involved in Armenian issues and with the friendship that has built up over the years, especially in VerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:05 Aug 03, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\041708 ANDY PsN: HAROLD 3 working with the Congress and recognizing the Armenian genocide, I read about the recent events in Armenia with great sadness. When OSCE monitors gave last year’s parliamentary election an improved grade, we all hoped for the best from this year’s Presi- dential election. Unfortunately, things took a turn for the worst after the election, and protest demonstrations have ended in vio- lence. Here, I want to extend my deep condolences along with you. I know Mr. Cardin and others on this Commission have said very similar things to the families of the eight people who died so trag- ically. Families have so much grief when one of their members dies under any circumstances, but I think the grief must be much sharper when the death comes through a conflict with the authori- ties of the country that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Armenia: a Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy
    6OJWFSTJU´U1PUTEBN "OKB.JIS]"SUVS.LSUJDIZBO]$MBVEJB.BIMFS]3FFUUB5PJWBOFO &ET "SNFOJB")VNBO3JHIUT1FSTQFDUJWF GPS1FBDFBOE%FNPDSBDZ )VNBO3JHIUT )VNBO3JHIUT&EVDBUJPOBOE.JOPSJUJFT Armenia: A Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy Human Rights, Human Rights Education and Minorities Edited by Anja Mihr Artur Mkrtichyan Claudia Mahler Reetta Toivanen Universitätsverlag Potsdam 2005 Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar. © Universität Potsdam, 2005 Herausgeber: MenschenRechtsZentrum der Universität Potsdam Vertrieb: Universitätsverlag Potsdam Postfach 60 15 53, 14415 Potsdam Fon +49 (0) 331 977 4517 / Fax 4625 e-mail: [email protected] http://info.ub.uni-potsdam.de/verlag.htm Druck: Audiovisuelles Zentrum der Universität Potsdam und sd:k Satz Druck GmbH Teltow ISBN 3-937786-66-X Dieses Manuskript ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Es darf ohne vorherige Genehmigung der Herausgeber nicht vervielfältigt werden. This book is published with the financial support of the Volkswagen Stiftung -Tandem Project Berlin/ Potsdam, Germany. The publication can be downloaded as PDF-file under: www.humanrightsresearch.de An Armenian version of the publication which includes papers of the con- ference and carries the title “Armenia from the perspective of Human Rights” was published by the Yerevan State University in Armenia in Au- gust 2005 and made possible through
    [Show full text]
  • International Exhibition of Arm in Accordance with the Decisi Armenia
    Release for International Exhibition of Arms and Defence Technologies “ ArmHiTec-2020” In accordance with the decision of the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Armenia, the Third International Exhibition of Arms and Defence Technologies “ArmHiTec- 2020" will be held in the period 26-28 March, 2020 at the Exhibition Complex "ErevanEXPO" (Yerevan, Republic of Armenia). The main objective of the International Exhibition of Arms and Defence Technologies “ArmHiTec-2020" is to develop military-economic and strategic partnership of the Republic of Armenia with its partner-countries, as well as to develop high -tech industry spheres. In 2020 the exhibition broadens its thematic sections. Along with the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Armenia the co-organizers of the event are: - MOD of the Republic of Armenia State Military Industry Committee, being aimed at financing the military, scientific research projects, as well as end products. It allows the Committee to work closely with IT companies, carrying out the contracts in the spheres of hi- tech industries. - Ministry of Hi-Tech Industry of the Republic of Armenia, being primarily the digital sphere, military and hi-tech industries. Within the Ministry a new department, responsible for military-technical cooperation with foreign countries is currently being created. The thematic sections of the exhibition have been completed with IT tech, cyber security, engineering labs, and creative centers sections to contribute to the department’s goals realization . The Second International Exhibition of Arms and Defence Technologies “ArmHiTec - 2018” was held in a period from 29 to 31 of March on the territory of “YerevanExpo” center in the capital city of the Republic of Armenia.
    [Show full text]
  • American University of Armenia the Impact Of
    AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF ARMENIA THE IMPACT OF DIASPORA AND DUAL CITIZENSHIP POLICY ON THE STATECRAFT PROCESS IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA A MASTER’S ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FOR PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS BY ARLETTE AVAKIAN YEREVAN, ARMENIA May 2008 SIGNATURE PAGE ___________________________________________________________________________ Faculty Advisor Date ___________________________________________________________________________ Dean Date AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF ARMENIA May 2008 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The work on my Master’s Essay was empowered and facilitated by the effort of several people. I would like to express my deep gratitude to my faculty adviser Mr. Vigen Sargsyan for his professional approach in advising and revising this Master’s Essay during the whole process of its development. Mr. Sargsyan’s high professional and human qualities were accompanying me along this way and helping me to finish the work I had undertaken. My special respect and appreciation to Dr. Lucig Danielian, Dean of School of Political Science and International Affairs, who had enormous impact on my professional development as a graduate student of AUA. I would like to thank all those organizations, political parties and individuals whom I benefited considerably. They greatly provided me with the information imperative for the realization of the goals of the study. Among them are the ROA Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Armenian Assembly of America Armenia Headquarter, Head Office of the Hay Dat (Armenian Cause) especially fruitful interview with the International Secretariat of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Bureau in Yerevan, Tufenkian Foundation, Mr. Ralph Yirikyan, the General Manager of Viva Cell Company, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Security Aspects of the South Stream Project
    BRIEFING PAPER Policy Department External Policies SECURITY ASPECTS OF THE SOUTH STREAM PROJECT FOREIGN AFFAIRS October 2008 JANUARY 2004 EN This briefing paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs. It is published in the following language: English Author: Zeyno Baran, Director Center for Eurasian Policy (CEP), Hudson Institute www.hudson.org The author is grateful for the support of CEP Research Associates Onur Sazak and Emmet C. Tuohy as well as former CEP Research Assistant Rob A. Smith. Responsible Official: Levente Császi Directorate-General for External Policies of the Union Policy Department BD4 06 M 55 rue Wiertz B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] Publisher European Parliament Manuscript completed on 23 October 2008. The briefing paper is available on the Internet at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/studies.do?language=EN If you are unable to download the information you require, please request a paper copy by e-mail : [email protected] Brussels: European Parliament, 2008. Any opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. © European Communities, 2008. Reproduction and translation, except for commercial purposes, are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and provided the publisher is given prior notice and supplied with a copy of the publication. EXPO/B/AFET/2008/30 October 2008 PE 388.962 EN CONTENTS SECURITY ASPECTS OF THE SOUTH STREAM PROJECT ................................ ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................iii 1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1 2. THE RUSSIAN CHALLENGE................................................................................... 2 2.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Designate Matthew J. Bryza by Senator Barbara Boxer (#1) Senate Foreign Relations Committee July 22, 2010
    Questions for the Record Submitted to Ambassador – Designate Matthew J. Bryza by Senator Barbara Boxer (#1) Senate Foreign Relations Committee July 22, 2010 Question: On June 18, a violent clash took place near Nagorno-Karabakh that left four ethnic Armenian troops and one Azerbaijani soldier dead. During your confirmation hearing, you suggested that Azerbaijani soldiers moved across the “Line of Contact.” If this is the case, why hasn’t the U.S. government been more forceful in its condemnation of Azerbaijan? Is the Government of Azerbaijan actively trying to escalate the conflict with Armenia? Answer: As Secretary Clinton made clear during her recent trip to the Caucasus, the United States condemns the use of force and regrets the loss of life that resulted from the incident during the night of June 18-19, 2010. The full details of what occurred on June 18 are not known. Regardless, the U.S. government believes strongly in the inadmissibility of the use of force or the threat of force and reiterates the need to remain engaged in the Minsk Group Process in pursuit of a peaceful settlement of the conflict. With active mediation by the United States and its French and Russian counterparts in the OSCE’s Minsk Group, President Aliyev and Sargsian have established an ongoing dialogue in an effort to achieve a peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict and the parties have come far towards reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. In June, 2010 the Presidents of the Minsk Group Co-Chair countries (France, Russia, and the United States) issued a joint statement calling on the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan to “take the next step and complete the work on the Basic Principles to enable the drafting of a peace agreement to begin.” If confirmed as Ambassador, I will urge President Aliyev to maintain his commitment to the Minsk Group process and do everything possible to support the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The View from Abkhazia of South Ossetia Ablaze
    Central Asian Survey Vol. 28, No. 2, June 2009, 235–246 The view from Abkhazia of South Ossetia ablaze Paula Garbà Department of Anthropology, University of California, Irvine, USA The Abkhazian and South Ossetian perspectives on the fighting between Georgians and South Ossetians in August 2008 could not be heard above the noise generated around the geopolitical implications of the larger Russian–Georgian clash. The population of Abkhazia experienced the violence in South Ossetia as though it was occurring on their own territory. This confirmed their complete lack of trust in the Georgian government’s commitment to peaceful resolution of the conflicts. In addition, they were disappointed with what they regarded as the international community’s absence of criticism of Georgia’s actions and lack of concern for the safety and well-being of the South Ossetians. Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia’s and Abkhazia’s independence has taken the question of Georgia’s territorial integrity off the negotiation table indefinitely. It also has set back the formal peace process with both South Ossetia and Abkhazia. An essential way forward, toward establishing trust as a necessary foundation for progress in the political negotiations, would be for the US and other interested countries to engage with the people of Abkhazia and South Ossetia at all levels, demonstrating credible and consistent concern for the safety and well being of all the people affected by the conflict. Keywords: conflict; culture; Abkhazia; South Ossetia Introduction Georgian–Abkhazian official relations since the end of the 1992–1993 war have offered little common ground for a mutually acceptable resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • "From Ter-Petrosian to Kocharian: Leadership Change in Armenia
    UC Berkeley Recent Work Title From Ter-Petrosian to Kocharian: Leadership Change in Armenia Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0c2794v4 Author Astourian, Stephan H. Publication Date 2000 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California University of California, Berkeley FROM TER-PETROSIAN TO KOCHARIAN: LEADERSHIP CHANGE IN ARMENIA Stephan H. Astourian Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Working Paper Series This PDF document preserves the page numbering of the printed version for accuracy of citation. When viewed with Acrobat Reader, the printed page numbers will not correspond with the electronic numbering. The Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies (BPS) is a leading center for graduate training on the Soviet Union and its successor states in the United States. Founded in 1983 as part of a nationwide effort to reinvigorate the field, BPSs mission has been to train a new cohort of scholars and professionals in both cross-disciplinary social science methodology and theory as well as the history, languages, and cultures of the former Soviet Union; to carry out an innovative program of scholarly research and publication on the Soviet Union and its successor states; and to undertake an active public outreach program for the local community, other national and international academic centers, and the U.S. and other governments. Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies University of California, Berkeley Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 260 Stephens Hall #2304 Berkeley, California 94720-2304 Tel: (510) 643-6737 [email protected] http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~bsp/ FROM TER-PETROSIAN TO KOCHARIAN: LEADERSHIP CHANGE IN ARMENIA Stephan H.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Post-Revolution State - Building in Ukraine and Armenia
    CES Working Papers – Volume XII, Issue 1 Change or continuity? Exploring post-revolution state - building in Ukraine and Armenia Aram TERZYAN* Abstract The paper focuses on the post-Maidan and post-Velvet Revolution state-building in Ukraine and Armenia. Examining the cases of Ukraine and Armenia, the qualitative, comparative analysis presented in this paper uncovers some of the similarities and differences between the two post-Soviet revolutions in terms of their political and economic implications. The study suggests that, while the revolutions have given a strong impetus to political and economic reforms in oligarchy-driven and corruption-stricken Ukrainian and Armenian societies, the path to ultimate success involves overcoming the authoritarian legacy and developing democratic institutions. The analysis of the relationship between domestic change and foreign policy shows that in contrast to Ukraine, where the “choice for Europe” was the core rationale behind the Euromaidan, the domestic change in Armenia has not led to foreign policy shifts. Nevertheless, this study avoids reductionist explanations of external drivers of change. Rather, it treats the domestic actors as the key agents to transform the economic and political landscapes of the two post-Soviet countries. Keywords: Ukraine, Armenia, “Velvet Revolution”, Maidan Revolution, state-building, democracy consolidation Introduction The 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine and the 2018 “Velvet Revolution” in Armenia have considerably renewed scientific interest in post-soviet revolution studies, including in post-revolution state-building trajectories. This paper represents an attempt to uncover some of the similarities and differences between the two post-Soviet revolutions in terms of their domestic and foreign policy implications.
    [Show full text]
  • Eu-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EU-ARMENIA PARLIAMENTARY COOPERATION COMMITTEE MINUTES of the TWELFTH MEETING 2-3 November 2011 Yerevan CONTENT 1. Welcome address by Mr Hovik ABRAHAMYAN, Chairman of the National 2 Assembly of the Republic of Armenia 2. Opening remarks by the Co-Chairs of the EU-Armenia PCC 2 3. Adoption of the draft agenda 3 4. Adoption of the minutes of the eleventh meeting of the EU-Armenia PCC held in Brussels on 1-2 December 2010 3 5. The state of play of relations between the EU and Armenia 3 - Political dialogue - Implementation of the ENP Action Plan - Negotiations on the EU-Armenia Association Agreement - Eastern Partnership - Mobility Partnership, Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements - DCFTA negotiations Statements by: - The Government of Armenia - The European Union 6. Political developments, reforms agenda in Armenia and EU-Armenia cooperation 5 - Political dialogue and last developments in Armenia - Reforms agenda in Armenia and EU-Armenia - The fight against corruption 7. Regional issues 9 - The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict - Regional cooperation and Armenia’s participation in the multilateral track of the Eastern Partnership - Armenia-Turkey relations 8. Follow-up of the Final Statement and Recommendations adopted at the eleventh meeting of the EU-Armenia PCC held in Brussels on 2-3 December 2010 9 9. Dialogue with representatives of the civil society 14 10. Adoption of the Final Statement and Recommendations 16 11. Any other business 16 12. Date and place of next meeting 16 ANNEX: List of participants ________________ PV\EN.doc 1 PE 495.735 The 12th EU- Armenia PCC under Co-Chairmanship of Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring of Armenian Broadcast Media Coverage of Elections to Ra National Assembly on April 2, 2017
    EU/CoE Joint Project Promote Professional and Responsible Journalism by Supporting Regional Network of Self-Regulatory Bodies MONITORING OF ARMENIAN BROADCAST MEDIA COVERAGE OF ELECTIONS TO RA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON APRIL 2, 2017 YEREVAN PRESS CLUB This document has been produced using funds of a Joint Project between the European Union and the Council of Europe. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union or the Council of Europe. PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2017 YEREVAN PRESS CLUB www.ypc.am 2 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2017 CONTENTS RESULTS OF THE ELECTIONS TO RA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON APRIL 2, 2017 4 KEY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE MONITORING OF COVERAGE OF 2017 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 5 REPORT ON MONITORING OF ARMENIAN BROADCAST MEDIA COVERAGE OF ELECTIONS TO RA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY IN 2017 7 GENERAL INFORMATION ON MONITORING 27 MONITORING METHODOLOGY 28 PARTIES/BLOCS INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF MONITORING 33 THE MEDIA STUDIED: BRIEF OVERVIEW 34 TABLES. PRE-ELECTION PROMOTION (MARCH 5-31, 2017) 35 TABLES. AHEAD OF PRE-ELECTION PROMOTION (FEBRUARY 15 - MARCH 4, 2017) 48 3 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2017 RESULTS OF THE ELECTIONS TO RA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON APRIL 2, 2017 On April 2, 2017, five parties and four blocs took part in the elections to the RA National Assembly by national electoral lists. On April 9, 2017, RA Central Electoral Commission announced the final voting results of the elections to the National Assembly. The votes cast for the parties/blocs were distributed in the following way (in percentage): Party/Bloc % 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Agriculture and Food Processing in Armenia
    SAMVEL AVETISYAN AGRICULTURE AND FOOD PROCESSING IN ARMENIA YEREVAN 2010 Dedicated to the memory of the author’s son, Sergey Avetisyan Approved for publication by the Scientifi c and Technical Council of the RA Ministry of Agriculture Peer Reviewers: Doctor of Economics, Prof. Ashot Bayadyan Candidate Doctor of Economics, Docent Sergey Meloyan Technical Editor: Doctor of Economics Hrachya Tspnetsyan Samvel S. Avetisyan Agriculture and Food Processing in Armenia – Limush Publishing House, Yerevan 2010 - 138 pages Photos courtesy CARD, Zaven Khachikyan, Hambardzum Hovhannisyan This book presents the current state and development opportunities of the Armenian agriculture. Special importance has been attached to the potential of agriculture, the agricultural reform process, accomplishments and problems. The author brings up particular facts in combination with historic data. Brief information is offered on leading agricultural and processing enterprises. The book can be a useful source for people interested in the agrarian sector of Armenia, specialists, and students. Publication of this book is made possible by the generous fi nancial support of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and assistance of the “Center for Agribusiness and Rural Development” Foundation. The contents do not necessarily represent the views of USDA, the U.S. Government or “Center for Agribusiness and Rural Development” Foundation. INTRODUCTION Food and Agriculture sector is one of the most important industries in Armenia’s economy. The role of the agrarian sector has been critical from the perspectives of the country’s economic development, food safety, and overcoming rural poverty. It is remarkable that still prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia made unprecedented steps towards agrarian reforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Serzh Sargsyan
    Poll: A Snapshot ahead of Armenia’s Presidential Elections Main findings 25 January 2013 CONTENT 1. Methodology and quality control of the survey 2. Interest and awareness in politics 3. The situation in Armenia 4. Voting intentions in the presidential elections 5. Voter characteristics and motivations 2 1. Methodology and quality control of the survey 3 Methodology • A multi-stage, random (probability) sampling design was used. In the first stage, primary sampling units (PSU) were selected from each of the administrative regional units. This was agreed as best methodology between TNS opinion and IPSC . • 1,607 interviews conducted face to face between 15 January – 20 January 2013. • Interviews were conducted in all 10 regions (marzes) of Armenia and in all Yerevan communities. The sample was distributed proportionally to reflect the population distribution in Armenia, with 34.1% of interviews conducted in Yerevan and 65.9 % in the marzes. • Interviewers selected households using the random walking method to ensure that there is no selection bias. To ensure a random selection, the person interviewed in each household was the adult whose birthday was closest to the day of the interview. • If a respondent was not immediately available, 1 to 2 call-back visits were done to conduct the interview later. If a call-back visit was not successful or if a respondent could not take part for other reasons, the interviewer approached the next randomly selected household according to the random walking method. • The sampling procedure was monitored by using a detailed contact sheet for each interviewer. The data base was analysed by TNS opinion in order to ensure that interviewers followed the instructions.
    [Show full text]