Press Review

(Saturday, November 17)

“Zhamanak” backs the Armenian government’s efforts to install another Armenian secretary general of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The paper says that on the line is not so much Armenia’s prestige as the credibility of the Russian-led organization. “Rebuffing Armenia would mean reaffirming that the CSTO is an unserious structure,” it says. “Russia has long regarded the CSTO as a platform for its its bilateral relations with ex-Soviet states, paying no attention to the unity of the bloc. By contrast, some of those ex-Soviet states, notably Belarus and Kazakhstan, view the CSTO as a vise with which they can grab Moscow and start imposing their will.”

“[Vladimir] Putin cannot overcome this situation without the help of Armenia, the CSTO’s sole decent member fully committed to the logic of the military-political bloc,” the paper goes on. “But another question is whether Armenia needs to quickly get Putin out of that situation or whether the continuation of that situation could give Armenia larger room for political maneuver.”

Ali Salami, an Iranian political analyst, assures “168 Zham” that Iran remains very sensitive to Armenia’s and Nagorno-Karabakh’s security concerns in its dealings with other regional players. Interviewed by the paper, Kayhan Barzegar, another Iranian analyst, calls for greater people-to-people and cultural contacts between the two nations.

“Aravot” looks at the thorny question of whether or not the government should provide the supreme head of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholicos Garegin II, with bodyguards on a permanent basis. “If Garegin appeals to relevant government bodies the latter must grant his request and ensure the security of the holder of such a high-level spiritual position,” editorializes the paper. “Arguments in favor of formalizing [such protection] through a law are unfounded. When they say that the Catholicos must be protected against attacks from representatives of sects or sexual minorities it is not clear whether they refer to physical or moral and ideological attacks. If there were physical attacks they must be dealt with by law-enforcement bodies, regardless of the attackers’ religious and sexual orientation. But if they are talking about ideological disputes, then any citizen has a right to express an opinion here.” The paper also says that Garegin has only himself to blame for his lack of popularity and influence in the country.

(Tatev Danielian)