Tweet
ARMENIA SHOULD SEND PEACEMAKERS TO LEBANON
Lragir.am
08 Sept 06
While the Armenian government is waiting until the mandate of
peacemaking force to Lebanon under the auspices of the UN is made
clear to decide on our participation to this mission, on September
8 the topic "Armenian Peacemakers in Lebanon. Pro et Contra" was
discussed at the Armenian Center of Strategic and National Studies.
All the participants were for our participation in the international
peacekeeping mission, and everyone had their reason. If we participate,
the Armenian community in Lebanon will feel safer, Armenia should have
its word in the world and the region independent from the existence
of an Armenian community in one country or another, with an active
policy we may downplay our smallness, etc.
And the following evaluations were already different.
Davit Hovanisyan, professor at Yerevan State University, thinks
that the Armenians consulted the leaders of the Armenian community
of Lebanon and they were against. Davit Hovanisyan thinks that
the community will be for the participation of Armenia in this
international mission.
The former minister of defense of Armenia Vagharshak Harutiunyan
thinks we can participate in the so-called rear peacemaking, sending
to Lebanon mine clearance teams, doctors, providing assistance
in reconstruction of infrastructures in Lebanon. According to
Vagharshak Harutiunyan, he mandate of the international forces is not
an obstacle. "All the conflict parties, Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah,
agree to stationing peacemakers." Unlike Iraq, where our peacemakers
are only part of the anti-Iraqi coalition. Vagharshak Harutiunyan
says the Armenians were sent to Iraq because there was a proposal
on behalf of the United States, whereas with regard to Lebanon our
government should take the initiative, therefore the question is
constantly being delayed. "In the case of Iraq the United States
expressed an emphasized wish, and made an aggressive proposal,"
says Armen Aghayan, member of the Civil Initiative for Defense of
Liberated Areas. He thinks that the inability of our government
to make independent decisions may lead to not sending Armenian
peacemakers to Lebanon. The question of participation of Armenian
peacemakers in Lebanon is solved in Washington, Brussels, Moscow,
says Alexander Iskandaryan, political scientist.
Edward Antinyan, representative of the Liberal Progressive Party
justified the Israeli attack on Lebanon, but he pointed out that it
is wrong to strike the peaceful population and non-military objects.
Edward Antinyan suggests going to Lebanon after establishing and
expressing an official standpoint. And the officials are waiting.
Edward Antinyan is against an absolutely pro-Lebanon standpoint in
going to Lebanon. It should be noted, however, that peacemakers go
to the given place not as a supporter of one of the sides but as a
peculiar wall, a human border between the two conflict parties.
Perhaps the deputy ambassador of Egypt to Armenia decided to speak
after listening to the words of Edward Antinyan. Sayid Shafey Abdul
Mohseh says if we accept that the Israelis have the right to return to
their historical homeland, we should also accept that Israel today is
an aggressor, there are occupied areas. "There is not a single Arab
country Israel has not had problems with." According to the deputy
ambassador, the question of Armenian peacemakers is the problem
of Armenia.
And one may only suppose when, how and to what extent the government
of Armenia will take into account the opinion of the participants of
the meeting.
Lragir.am
08 Sept 06
While the Armenian government is waiting until the mandate of
peacemaking force to Lebanon under the auspices of the UN is made
clear to decide on our participation to this mission, on September
8 the topic "Armenian Peacemakers in Lebanon. Pro et Contra" was
discussed at the Armenian Center of Strategic and National Studies.
All the participants were for our participation in the international
peacekeeping mission, and everyone had their reason. If we participate,
the Armenian community in Lebanon will feel safer, Armenia should have
its word in the world and the region independent from the existence
of an Armenian community in one country or another, with an active
policy we may downplay our smallness, etc.
And the following evaluations were already different.
Davit Hovanisyan, professor at Yerevan State University, thinks
that the Armenians consulted the leaders of the Armenian community
of Lebanon and they were against. Davit Hovanisyan thinks that
the community will be for the participation of Armenia in this
international mission.
The former minister of defense of Armenia Vagharshak Harutiunyan
thinks we can participate in the so-called rear peacemaking, sending
to Lebanon mine clearance teams, doctors, providing assistance
in reconstruction of infrastructures in Lebanon. According to
Vagharshak Harutiunyan, he mandate of the international forces is not
an obstacle. "All the conflict parties, Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah,
agree to stationing peacemakers." Unlike Iraq, where our peacemakers
are only part of the anti-Iraqi coalition. Vagharshak Harutiunyan
says the Armenians were sent to Iraq because there was a proposal
on behalf of the United States, whereas with regard to Lebanon our
government should take the initiative, therefore the question is
constantly being delayed. "In the case of Iraq the United States
expressed an emphasized wish, and made an aggressive proposal,"
says Armen Aghayan, member of the Civil Initiative for Defense of
Liberated Areas. He thinks that the inability of our government
to make independent decisions may lead to not sending Armenian
peacemakers to Lebanon. The question of participation of Armenian
peacemakers in Lebanon is solved in Washington, Brussels, Moscow,
says Alexander Iskandaryan, political scientist.
Edward Antinyan, representative of the Liberal Progressive Party
justified the Israeli attack on Lebanon, but he pointed out that it
is wrong to strike the peaceful population and non-military objects.
Edward Antinyan suggests going to Lebanon after establishing and
expressing an official standpoint. And the officials are waiting.
Edward Antinyan is against an absolutely pro-Lebanon standpoint in
going to Lebanon. It should be noted, however, that peacemakers go
to the given place not as a supporter of one of the sides but as a
peculiar wall, a human border between the two conflict parties.
Perhaps the deputy ambassador of Egypt to Armenia decided to speak
after listening to the words of Edward Antinyan. Sayid Shafey Abdul
Mohseh says if we accept that the Israelis have the right to return to
their historical homeland, we should also accept that Israel today is
an aggressor, there are occupied areas. "There is not a single Arab
country Israel has not had problems with." According to the deputy
ambassador, the question of Armenian peacemakers is the problem
of Armenia.
And one may only suppose when, how and to what extent the government
of Armenia will take into account the opinion of the participants of
the meeting.