Yerevan

Politinės intrigosSkaitomiausios

Arūnas Spraunius

„Slaptai.lt“ portale prieš kurį laiką publikuotas laiškas Armėnijos prezidentui Seržui Sargsyanui, kurį 2017-ųjų paskutinėmis gruodžio dienomis parašė ir per žiniasklaidą paskelbė (svarbi aplinkybė) įtakingas jo tautietis, Rusijoje gyvenantis bei šios valstybės pilietybę turintis armėnas verslininkas Levonas Markosas (http://www.lragir.am/index/rus/0/right/view/60061).

Liūdnai pagarsėjęs Seržas Sargsianas

Neperpasakojant detaliai viso laiško turinio (lietuviškai galima perskaityti adresu – (https://slaptai.lt/gintaras-visockas-keletas-patarimu-armenijai-ir-armenijos-draugams/) tik konstatuotina, kad jo autorius išvardija prezidento S.Sargsyano prašymu savo nuo 2000 metų pradžios nuveiktus darbus bei pradėtus projektus, gelbėjant Armėnijos ekonomiką, kuriuos auditoriai iš Maskvos įvertino 300 milijonų JAV dolerių suma. L.Markoso įsitikinimu, tie projektai galėjo duoti rimtą impulsą Armėnijos ekonomikai, deja, galų gale investuotojas patyrė nuostolių ir buvo priverstas aiškintis su teismo antstoliais. Laiško autoriui Armėnijoje iškelta baudžiamoji byla bei paskelbta tarptautinė paieška. L.Markosas prezidentą S.Sargsyaną kaltina apgaule, jog „Tėvynės gelbėjimo“ dingstimi šis „įbrukęs“ jam bankrutavusį „Credit-Yerevan“ banką, ši afera prasukta dalyvaujant prezidento šeimai ir kitiems aukštiems pareigūnams. L.Markosas yra įsitikinęs, kad anksčiau ar vėliau teisingumas dėl apgautų armėnų verslininkų, gviešiantis jų pinigų, nugalės, tik retoriškai klausia, ar tai gali nutikti šaliai vadovaujant S.Sargsyanui.

Šią istoriją galima vertinti įvairiai – tarkime, kaip „tik“ verslo subjektų aiškinimąsi (nors adresatas – aukščiausias Armėnijos valstybės pareigūnas), posovietinėje erdvėje tokių istorijų kaip netrūko, taip ir netrūksta. Vis dėlto, kiek ir kodėl ši istorija tipiška, juo labiau, kad L.Markosas teigia, jog į jį kreipiasi daug tėvynainių, kurie su kartėliu pasakoja apie savivalę Armėnijoje, kur sukonstruota korupcinė sistema?

Keletas istorijų. Kaukazo politikos bei naujienų interneto puslapis „jam-news.net“ praėjusių metų vasario 24-ąją informavo apie Armėnijos nacionalinio saugumo tarnybos (NST) įvykdytas operacijas, kurių metu demaskuotas už palankų sprendimą baudžiamojoje byloje maždaug 8 tūkstančių dolerių reikalavęs teisėjas, įgaliojimus viršijęs policininkas, visaip „tempęs“ sprendimą dėl piliečio pamesto karinio bilieto atkūrimo, mat tikėjosi iš šio 200 dolerių, suklastotus diplomus išdavusios trys aukštosios mokyklos ir areštas Darbo bei socialinių klausimų ministerijos 12-ai pareigūnų, kurie už invalidumo grupės suteikimą ėmė maždaug 40-80 dolerių kyšius. Vienas suimtųjų Armenas Sogoyanas vadovavo medicininės-socialinės ekspertizės centrui, kurio ankstesnis vadovas Mikaelis Vanianas 2012-ųjų spalį atleistas iš darbo už tą patį. Taigi galima kalbėti apie korupcinių tradicijų „perimamumą“.

Vis dėlto tai smulkmė fone tokių istorijų kaip armėnų spaudoje aprašyti buvusio finansų ministro Gagiko Khachatryano (pasak armėnų spaudos, neprarandančio vilties grįžti į vykdomąją vakdžią) šeimos turtai, kai jo broliai politikui kylant karjeros laiptais pirko nekilnojamojo turto JAV už dešimtis milijonų dolerių. Pasak Korupcijos organizuoto nusikalstamumo tyrimų centro (https://www.occrp.org/ru/investigations/6395-sons-of-yerevan-minister-sell-hollywood-mansion), NST pernai ėmėsi publikacijose paskebtų faktų tyrimo, bet po savaitės jį nutraukė, nesikreipusi į Amerikos teisėsaugą pagalbos ir nepaaiškinusi bylos nutraukimo motyvų.

Savo ruožtu S.Markosas laiške nurodo, jog pastaraisiais metais apiplėšti 34 stambūs armėnų verslininkai, naudojantis išbandyta schema: iš pradžių iš žmonių „Tėvynės labui“ išviliojami dideli pinigai, paskui jiems surezgami kaltinimai, siekiant nušalinti nuo verslo ir išstumti iš Armėnijos, o „parduotus“ objektus pasisavinti kaip ir sumokėtus už juos pinigus. Esą taip prezidentas S.Sarkisianas susikrovė milijoninius turtus skurstančioje Armėnijoje.

Intereno leidinys „oc-media.org“ praėjusių metų lapkričio 24-ąją informavo, kaip valdančiųjų politikų figūravimas verslo struktūrose užtikrina jų nebaudžiamumą. Tarkime, prekybos centrų tinklo „Yerevan City“, kurių vienas savininkų yra valdančiosios Respublikonų partijos deputatas Samvelas Aleksanyanas, kasininkės dirba praktiškai be atostogų, jų mėnesinis uždarbis neviršija 165 JAV dolerių.

Dar vieną Armėnijos sostinės prekybos tinklą SAS valdo irgi deputatas respublikonas Artakas Sarkisianas, pastarasis į Armėnijos nacionalinį susirinkimą (parlamentą) praėjusių metų balandį vykusiuose rinkimuose pateko pagal partinį sąrašą. Leidinys „Hayastan24“ balandžio 13-ąją paskelbė koncerno „SAS Group“ susirinkimo garso įrašą, kur nežinomas asmuo reikalauja iš darbuotojų sąrašų rinkėjų, kuriuos šie įsipareigoja palenkti balsuoti už koncerno bosą, o suorganizavusiems daugiausia balsų žada atostogas Paryžiuje.

Po publikacijos kilus triukšmui generalinė prokuratūra pasiuntė įrašą Specialiąjai tyrimų grupei, ši balandžio 19 dieną užvedė baudžiamąją bylą, tačiau rugsėjo 8-ąją ją nutraukė, argumentavusi sprendimą nusikaltimo sudėties nebuvimu.

Armėnijos antikorupcinių programų centro vadovo Varuzhano Oktaniano vertinimu, kova su korupcija jo šalyje tebus šou, kol atsakomybėn nebus patraukti aukščiausi pareigūnai, ypač turint galvoje aplinkybę, kad korupciniai nusikaltimai valdžios struktūrose kartojasi. Tačiau tam reikia politinės valios, kurios kol kas nėra. Valdžiai tai – ne pirmaeilė problema, ji korupcijos teikiamomis galimybėmis tebesinaudoja.

Buvusio Armėnijos ministro pirmininko Hoviko Abrahamyano Kovos su korupcija tarybos įsteigimą 2015-ųjų vasarį lydėjo nemenkas visuomeninis rezonansas, mat į jos sudėtį įtraukti aukšti valstybės pareigūnai (politinė opozicija bei visuomeninės organizacijos deleguoti atstovus į Tarybą atsisakė), sprendžiant iš jų turto deklaracijų, patys prisidėjo prie korupcinių procesų. Tarkime, tuometinis premjeras bei finansų ministras yra doleriniai milijonieriai, jų šeimos valdo daugybę pelningų kompanijų.

Todėl ekspertai kovą su korupcija vertina kaip pakankamai dirbtinę. Armėnijos teisininkų asociacijos pirmininkas Karenas Zadoyanas susiklosčiusioje situacijoje net įžvelgia pavojų šalies nacionaliniam saugumui. Korupcijos grėsmę praėjusių metų vasario 2-ąją skelbdamas metinę ataskaitą pažymėjo ir Amerikos ambasadorius Armėnijoje Richardas P. Millsas. Diplomatas kritikavo su JAV tarptautinio vystymosi agentūros (USAID) parama įsteigtą Kovos su korupcija tarybą, nurodęs, kad šiai per porą veiklos metų JAV skyrė vos 2,5 proc. numatytų lėšų dėl veiklos neefektyvumo. R.P. Millsas taip pat perspėjo, jog tokia padėtis gali pakenkti investicijoms į Armėnijos ekonomiką.

Armėnų separatistų sugriautas Terteras. Kalnų Karabachas. Slaptai.lt foto

2015 metų birželio 25-ąją paskelbtoje JAV valstybės departamento ataskaitoje apie žmogaus teises pasaulyje nurodoma, jog daugiausia pažeidimų Armėnijoje 2014 metais padaryta dėl sisteminės korupcijos, neskaidrios vyriausybės veiklos ir ribotos teismų nepriklausomybės.

Gruodžio 6-ąją svarstant 2018 metų valstybės biudžeto projektą Nacionaliniame susirinkime parlamentinės komisijos europinės integracijos klausimais pirmininkė Naira Zohrabyan pareiškė, jog, nors valdžia ne kartą deklaravo taikysianti Singapūro patirtį kovojant su korupcija, ši tebeklesti, todėl Armėnijoje nėra tinkamų sąlygų užsienio investicijoms, skirtingai nuo to paties Singapūro. Interento leidinys „eadaily.com“ jau šių metų sausio 9-ąją citavo ekonomistą,  opozicinio Armėnijos nacionalinio judėjimo politiką Ovanesą Igityaną, pasak kurio, korupcinės schemos lemia pirmo būtinumo prekių bei komunalinių paslaugų kainas šalyje. Armėnijos piliečiai moka daugiau negu Kaukazo regiono ir net Europos gyventojai. Ekonomistas irgi nurodė, jog korupcinė sudedamoji daro šalį labai nepatrauklią užsienio investicijoms, todėl jos pastaraisiais metais mažėja. Šį procesą lydi kapitalo traukimasis, nes armėnų verslininkai nenori investuoti į savo šalies ekonomiką.

Čia jau atsiremiame į geopolitinį-vertybinį pasirinkimą – šalis siekia apsivalymo per skaidrias demokratines procedūras ar lieka prie Rusijos prezidento Vladimiro Putino „rankinės politikos“ stiliaus. Kaip žinia, oficialusis Jerevanas vienu metu mėgina „sėdėti“ ant dviejų – ES rytų partnerystės bei Maskvos diriguojamos Nepriklausomų valstybių sąjungos (NVS) – geopolitinių „kėdžių“, nors daugelis savo šaliai civilizuotos raidos linkinčių armėnų bei šalies draugų perspėja apie tokio pasirinkimo aklavietę.

Dėl Armėnijos – Rusijos agresijos azerbaidžanietiškasis Kalnų Karabachas paverstas griuvėsiais. Slaptai.lt nuotr.

JAV Vidurio Azijos ir Kaukazo intituto direktorius bei Stokholmo saugumo politikos bei vystymosi intituto vienas steigėjų Svantė Cornellas žurnale „The American Interest” paskelbtoje publikacijoje „Kunkuliuojantis Kaukazas“ (2017 05 10) priminė, kad Armėnija ilgą laiką mėgino derinti Rusijos paramą gynybos srityje (glaustis po jos „saugumo skėčiu“, siekdama išlaikyti užgrobtą Kalnų Karabachą) su viltimis suartėti su Vakarais. Galų gale tai lėmė šalies ekonomikos nuosmukį ir milžinišką skolą Rusijai, kurią Maskva mielai „atleido“ mainais už Armėnijos ekonomikos strateginių sektorių kontrolę.

Jerevano siekį formuoti ryšius su JAV ir ES (2010 metais pradėjo derybas dėl asocijuotos narystės) sužlugdė augantys Maskvos ir ES nesutarimai,  2013-ųjų rugsėjį prezidentas S.Sargsyanas paskelbė apie šalies atsisakymą siekti narystės ES Rusijos dominuojamos Eurazijos ekonominės sąjungos (EES) naudai.

Tai negalėjo neturėti įtakos Armėnijos vidaus politikai, susijusiai ir su demokratija bei žmogaus teisėmis. Armėnijos Helsinkio komiteto pirmininko Avetiko Ishkhanyano, programos „Armėnijos saugumo politikos aptarimo gerinimas“ bei Armėnijos tarptautinių santykių bei saugumo instituto pranešimas „Žmogaus teisių padėtis Armėnijoje: sisteminės problemos senos ir naujos konstitucijų šviesoje“ (http://www.lragir.am/index/rus/0/right/view/46591 2016 01 28) pradedama nuo konstatacijos, jog dažniausiai į Armėnijos piliečių teises kėsinasi vykdomoji valdžia, ypač jos galios struktūros. Tokiomis aplinkybėmis žmogų gina ne įstatymas, bet tarnybinis statusas bei finansinės galimybės (čia pateikta pavyzdžių, kad dalis parlamento narių bei ministrų tuo pat metu yra ir verslininkai). Armėnijoje valdžia reiškia ne tik valdymą, bet ir pelningą verslą.

Rusijos ir Armėnijos vadovai Vladimiras Putinas ir Seržas Sargsianas. Rusijos karinė bazė Giumri mieste. 2013 metai

Prastėjančią situaciją žmogaus teisių srityje konstatavo ir dalyviai 2016 metų spalio 20-ąją Vašingtone surengto Armėnijos politikos temai skirto forumo, kuriame pranešimus skaitė Armėnijos Helsinkio komiteto, „Transparency International“, „Human Rights Watch“, Nacionalinio demokratijos paramos fondo, Amerikos advokatų asociacijos, Georgo Washingtono universiteto teisės fakulteto atstovai. Pagrindinėmis priežastimis vėlgi nurodytos jau sisteminis korupcijos pobūdis, verslo bei politikos elitų susiliejimas, nepriklausomos teismų sistemos nebuvimas ir stipri priklausomybė nuo autoritarinės Rusijos.

Praėjusį rugžjūtį viešėdamas Armėnijoje JAV politologas, filosofas, žurnalo „The American Interest“ redakcinės kolegijos pirmininkas bei garsiojo esė „Istorijos pabaiga“ autorius Francis Fukuyama interviu „The Armenian interest“ prastą valstybinių institucijų kokybę dėl korupcijos įvardijo viena didžiausių Armėnijos problemų. Glaudūs ryšiai su Maskva nepadeda spręsti problemos, mat Rusijoje galioja lygiai tokia pat sistema. Fr.Fukuyamos vertinimu, diegiant civilizuotas vertybes ir balansuojant Maskvos įtaką, svarų vaidmenį galėtų vaidinti diaspora.

Armėnijos okupuotas Kalnų Karabachas žemėlapyje. Slaptai.lt nuotr.

Filosofas pateikė Estijos pavyzdį – daugelis estų griuvus Berlyno sienai patraukė į JAV ir Vakarų Europą, ten išsimokslino, padarė sėkmingas karjeras ir grįžo, kai Estijos visuomenė tapo  demokratiška. Ir Armėnijai gausi jos diaspora gali tapti žmogiško kapitalo bei žinių šaltiniu.

Bet tam vis tiek reikia stimulo. Armėnų dienraštis „Haykakan Zhamanak“ šių metų sausio 28-oisos numeryje, svarstydamas apie valstybės brandą, nurodė, kad tai galėtų būti laisvi rinkimai, sumažėjęs korupcijos bei emigracijos mastas, konkurencinga ekonomika, nuo verslo atribota valdininkija ir nors šiek tiek teisingumą vykdantys teismai. Tikra pereinamojo periodo klasika.

Deja, ir „Haykakan Zhamanak“ pripažįsta, jog beveik 30 metų nepriklausomybę turinčiai Armėnijai kol kas šio egzamino išlaikyti nepavyksta, nes valdžiai šalies branda neatrodo svarbiausias klausimas.

2018.03.19; 08:08

English

Svante Cornell, Research Director of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute and co-founder of the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy, published an article in “The American Interest” called “The Raucous Caucasus” (May 10, 2017) where he reminded that Armenia had long tried to balance its reliance on Russia for security (it had accepted a Russian security umbrella to safeguard its conquest of Nagorno-Karabakh) with its hopes of growing closer to the West.

As a result, there was a deep economic downturn and Armenia accumulated a huge debt to Russia, which Moscow was more than happy to “forgive” in exchange for controlling stakes in the strategic assets of Armenia’s economy. Yerevan sought to develop what positive relations it could with the United States and especially the European Union (in 2010, it began to negotiate an Association Agreement, including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA)), but when Moscow soured on the EU, Yerevan’s policy became untenable. And in September 2013, President Serzh Sargsyan announced that Armenia would jettison the EU agreement for membership in the Russian-dominated Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).

His decision Armenian president spoke in Moscow, following a meeting with Putin; he had consulted neither his government nor his parliament. Similarly, Putin had not deigned to consult with the leaders of Belarus and Kazakhstan, the other members of the EEU.

Such circumstances obviously had an impact on Armenia’s domestic policies related to democracy and human rights – Moscow intends to make Armenia its vassal by “delegating” its own style of internal organization, where all decisions are made by one person, what can be seen in a regime of the new Russia. Moscow’s control of Armenia extended, although, according to S. Cornell, that submission didn’t have the expected benefits, however: when major fighting broke out in April 2016 between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh, rather than coming to Yerevan’s defense, Moscow assumed a rather neutral stance, hoping to achieve a total domination over all Caucasus region.

Avetik Ishkhanyan, President of the Helsinki Committee of Armenia, in his programme “Armenian Security Improvement Policy” and in report “Situation of Human Rights in Armenia: Systemic Problems in the Light of Old and New Constitutions” (http://www.lragir.am/index/rus/0/right/view/46591) starts with a statement that usually citizen rights are threatened by executive authority, especially its power structures, and justice, by definition, is reconstructed by judicial system. In case of Armenia, all governmental structures are ruled by and obey commands of one single person – the president can punish one of his own, more specifically, he can issue a command to punish a subordinate from his own circle, and at the same time, people who are part of this circle, especially in power structures, are the main foundation of Armenian government.

Armenia has no honest trials and one of the indirect proofs supporting this claim is that a number of acquittals is as low as 2 percent, also almost all requests from investigators to arrest suspects are granted. The report of 2002-2013 by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture addresses the problem of regular tortures in some penitentiary institutions.

Thus Armenian people are protected not by law but by their official status and financial situation. These two powers usually “overlap” as most of the deputies and government ministers are businessmen as well. Law officers and their family members often get into scandals related to criminal activities, but, as a rule of thumb, they often come out unpunished. Authors of the report call this an impunity or selective justice. In Armenia, the authority means not only governance but also wealth and profitable business which needs to be preserved by all means necessary, sometimes even illegally.

Such fusion of business and authority is related to constant electoral fraud and absence of separation of power principle, and it confirms that human rights violations are already systematic. In everyday life people are indifferent to such state if it does not apply to them personally or violations do not grow to such proportions as in March 2008, when 10 people were killed and 250 injured during the clash between police and protesters. The guilty was not found and no one was punished. According to authors of the report, the worst situation is of socially unprotected part of society: they do not get basic medical aid; labour law is no use for them (they work like slaves, without any contracts, days-off or leave). Absence of separation of power principle allows businessmen=officials, who pursue maximum profit, get out of control; there are no independent labour unions; and the most influential political parties almost never talk about social justice.

Instead, in 2013, President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan organized a referendum (December 6, 2015) which proposed some constitutional amendments that would lead country towards parliamentary system. According to authors of “Situation of Human Rights in Armenia: Systemic Problems in the Light of Old and New Constitutions”, the main reason of these amendments were to help ruling party (related to President) to stay in power – Article 50 of the old constitution restricted the same person to be reelected as Armenian President two times in a row. The Parliament, however, can be ruled by the same political party (it appoints the Prime Minister) for the unlimited duration. 

Article 89 of the new Constitution requires a mandatory formation of stable (about 60 percent) parliamentary majority after elections. Having in mind what was said, it can be presumed, that ruling Republican Party would pursue this “stable majority” at all costs. It was confirmed during Referendum on constitutional amendments, when many blatant violations were witnessed: voter bribery, voter impersonation, forgery of the electoral list, offering voters a “ride” to constituency, putting pressure on and threatening election observers and journalists.

On April 2, 2017, for the first time elections were held according to party list system (almost 61 percent of Armenian nationals attended the elections). A group of civil activists from “Citizen Observer” informed about more than 100 cases of malfunctioning fingerprint registration devices, and more than 150 cases of procedure irregularities (for example, ballots were submitted to ballot boxes by members of Electoral commission). Sisak Gabrielian, a correspondent for the radio station “Svoboda”, was assaulted in Yerevan after he witnessed “good” voters receiving money in headquarters of Akop Beglaryan, candidate of Republican Party). The Pro-President Republican Party won the elections with 46 percent of votes. A new president will be appointed by this political party which now dominates the Parliament.

Authors of this report pessimistically summarizes, that by surrendering its ambitions for the EU membership Armenia distances itself even further from civilized human rights standards. After regaining independence in 1990, Armenia declared loyalty for democracy – with joining the United Nations (UN) it ratified The European Convention on Human Rights. In 2001 Armenia became a full member of the council of Europe; it had satisfied its obligation to establish an independent ombudsman to investigate human rights violations; verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights became valid. Further movement towards the EU membership could have had a dissuasive effect as it could be seen from the historical example of the Baltic States.

Unfortunately, the desire for power at any price, together with a very specific geopolitical situation of the country, left the need of citizens’ rights only on a level of declarations. The decision to join Russian-ruled EES in 2013 distanced Armenia from these standards even further.

Worsening human rights situation was also noted by members of Policy Forum Armenia which was hosted in Washington, on October 20, 2016. Presentations were made by representatives of Armenian Helsinki Committee, “Transparency International”, “Human Rights Watch”, National Endowment for Democracy fund, American Lawyers Association and George Washington University Law School. Once again as the main causes of this situation were indicated Armenian constitutional system that allows accumulation of power in the hands of one man, already consistent corruption, amalgamation of business and political elite, absence of independent judicial system, and finally – strong dependence on authoritarian Russia.

David Grigoryan, one of the cofounders of “Policy Forum Armenia”, noted, that Armenia is one of the leading countries worldwide according to a relative number of policemen (per capita). In such structure, where signs of police state can be seen, the system of government shows more and more confidence and starts displaying inadequate power against its citizens, what exactly happened during protests in July, 2016.

Jane Buchanan, Associate Director of the Europe and Central Asia Division at Human Rights Watch, noticed increase of the so-called Robin Hood effect, when citizens, disappointed with current economic and social conditions, start sympathizing with those who break the law.

2017.07.20; 06:30

English

Slaptai.lt presents a very interesting article by Parliament member Arvydas Anušauskas (who is also member of the Seimas Committee on National Security and Defense). The article is titled “Twisted Footprints in Daugai: Among Russian Deputies of the State Duma, Oligarchs, Diplomats, Federal Security Agents and Soldiers”.

Lakes of Dzūkija. Foto – Vytautas Visockas (Slaptai.lt).

The afore mentioned analysis was published in the second half of 2016 at author’s homepage www.arvydasanusauskas.lt, yet the article holds important information to this day. The analysis raises a question – what methods does Russia employ trying to spread its roots in our country: does Russia disguise it with sports, economic investments or Armenian refugees?

Interestingly enough, this article has not yet been analyzed or discussed in greater detail.

2017.06.24

XXX

Arvydas Anušauskas

Twisted Footprints in Daugai: Among Russian Deputies of the State Duma, Oligarchs, Diplomats, Federal Security Agents and Soldiers

A New Tradition in Daugai.

It is known, that 15ha land by the Lake Didžiulis in Daugai, including structures, has been property of private local business till 2013.

However, in 2013, all shares of that local business were sold to “Daugų sala”, company registered in Alytus. According to the data of the Centre of Registers, the company was founded in summer 2012. Later, some information appeared in the press, that officially the business was acquired by some company registered in Lithuania, but the real owners were Muscovites, whose activities included constructions, “gold trade” and many other things. In Daugai they planned investing into a very specific area – field hockey. The press was told that they plan building some hotels and few hockey fields. Yet looking over some of the publicly available documents some questions remain unanswered. Why a group of Muscovites acquired such local business in the beginning of 2013, and did the buyers have enough financial resources?

The second question: if the buyers had no money – who and why provided it to them?

The last question is a tricky one: what is a relation between the buyers and the fund of member ofthe Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation?

Interestingly enough, public limited company “Tradition-L”, which was registered in Moscow on October 22, 2012, in just a month, on November 27, acquired 90 percent of “Daugų sala“ shares from one person in Alytus. On January 11, 2013, “Tradition-L” buys the company that ownedaforementioned real estate in Daugai. It is possible that this company was connected to family of one active Lithuanian Social Democrat.

The operation of acquisition was instant – only 80 days since the appearance of the company in Moscow.

The majority shareholder of “Tradition-L” was entrepreneur Ara Ginosyan, who had one third of company’s shares. Other business partners shared smaller holdings, 6.67 percent each. Do not be fooled – the starting capital of the company was only 30,000 rubles, thus majority share holder’s share was of 1000 litas value at that time. It could not be otherwise – company’s office was in remote suburbs of Moscow, where the same commercial building was shared by many small businesses and only neighbors were logistics centers.

Interestingly, “Tradition-L” activities in Moscow was not well known. According to trade-rent indicators, it placed 2750th in a list of similar companies. How could the company have 2 million litas in its balance for all those purchases (according to daily newspaper “Verslo žinios”, Armenian shareholders invested 600,000 Euro or about 2.07 million litas)? Why one of the “Tradition-L” shareholders Grach Petrosyan (with a holding of few hundred litas of shares) was responsible for this purchase? It was noted, that company’s shareholders could engage in various other activities, however, renting apartments for Armenian laborers (and some bakery business shares) was its only profitable activity. Grach Petrosyan’s company “Urartu”, with initial capital of 10,000 rubles (about 1,000 litas), could engage in “whole sale trade in gold and other precious metals”, as well asin “wholesale trade in gems”, yet its sole declared activity was constructions. In fact, these alleged constructions could not be found, as the company was liquidated in summer 2013. It could not be the other way – company’s office was in Dmitrov town, Moscow Oblast, where the same commercial building was shared by many small businesses.

Namely Grach Petrosyan becomes the main “player” at Daugai. In 2013 he founds Daugai field hockey club “Nansen club” and becomes its president. The club instantly joins Lithuanian business club in Moscow (alongside “Vičiūnai”, “Rūta” and other large manufacturers) when in reality there were no actual “business”. “Nansen club” was titled“a unique sports center” where international “lifeguard teams” would be trained. Firstly, in October 2013, the idea was to establish an international school of lifeguards where divers and land lifeguards could be trained. It was planned that lifeguards and field hockey players would get 3 houses for 20 people each in this recreational base. On August 1, 2015, Grach Petrosyan introduced his plans: the club will train “leaders” among the youth from CIS member states. According to him: “all unconventional games in this club are dedicated for one goal – training all-rounded youth “whoare not afraid to take responsibility and who can become full-time lifeguards”. The club prioritizes meeting of young people from different countries who could later become “an international lifeguard team”. In 2015 Petrosyan announced, that he will build one more training base dedicated to working in extreme conditions. Medical training will be part of the education: two or three times a month pupils will visit medicine institute and morgue, they will learn how to sew wounds and how to treat broken or severed limbs (meanwhile, an assembled team of amateur field hockey players takes the third place in B division of Lithuanian Championship).

Member of Lithuanian parliament Arvydas Anušauskas. Slaptai.lt foto

Interestingly, instead of Grach Petrosyan, his twin brother Grant Petrosyan is the real field hockey specialist – an honored field hockey coach in Armenia and former coach of Armenian women field hockey national team. In 1994 he came to Novosibirsk where he had a small business. Instead of caring for the future of field hockey in Daugai, Grant Petrosyan tried to revive this sport in his hometown Gyumri (former Leninakan, which was destroyed during an earthquake in 1988). From 2010 he supported Gyumri youth field goal team. Since 2007 he had an idea of building “Sport-City” complex in his hometown that would include 35 different sport attractions. Yet his ideas during the years 2007-2012 were not interesting to anybody. All suddenly changed in the end of 2012 when Russia became interested in possibilities to spread its influence in Armenia and Lithuania.

From FSB Novosibirsk towards Karelin.

After 2012 elections, Lithuania started preparing for the presidency of the Council of the EU. Starting from January 2013, it was going to be an important member of the trio. Armenia had its presidential elections coming in February 2013, and it had to choose between the Eurasian Customs Union andthe EU Association Agreement. It is obvious, that due to an old tradition, Russian Federal Security Service had its influence in these foreign politics. One of the strongest directorates of Russian FSB always was in Novosibirsk where FSB had its own school and many supervised academic centers. Almost 40 thousand Armenians lived in Novosibirsk. Part of FSB activities were associated with these Armenians to keep Armenia under Russia’s influence. Many leaders made their careers in this FSB directorate as it was an important knot between Europe and Asia – there were always some work to do. Chekists from Novosibirsk were usuallygiven a job in Moscow: FSB Colonel General Yevgeniy Sysoyev, Head of FSB Novosibirsk Regional Directorate 2009-2011, left to Moscow and was later appointed Deputy Director of Russia’s FSB and Head of the National Antiterrorism Committee. General Lieutenant Viktor Ivanovich Batukin, the next Head of FSB Novosibirsk Regional Directorate, was also summoned to Moscow and Sergei Boiko took his place in April 15, 2013.

We can only guess, that FSB Novosibirsk Regional Directorate knew about business activities of Petrosyan twins in Moscow and Novosibirsk and that one of them was trying to implement his projects in his Armenian hometown where Russian military base was located. Grant Petrosyan’s Gyumri “Sport-City” project was remembered and the Russian government promised its financial support. Maybe in return he had to do a favor – to acquire essentially useless real estate in Lithuania? Or maybe one of the brothers had to establish Nansen club where “lifeguards” would be trained (and which later would agitate for giving refugees and non-citizens so called “Nansen passports”) and had to join Lithuanian business club in Moscow? Maybe another brother had to contribute with a positive influence among Armenian diaspora in Novosibirsk and Gyumri? Maybe all these questions are retorical? Maybe all of this is just a conspiracy theory?

Was it a coincidence, that just after the successful transaction in Lithuania, on February 12, 2013, there was a meeting between Grant Petrosyan (brother of Grach Petrosyan), businessman from Novosibirsk Artur Movsesyan and members of “Karelin-Fund” belonging to Aleksandr Karelin (politician, athlete, member of State Duma’s International Affairs Committee).

One of the members ofthis initiative group was Ruben Tatulian, businessman from Sochi, who build Karelin’s sports center for training Russian national teams. According to Grant Petrosyan, the construction was needed not only to improve social situation but also for family members of Russian soldiers who wanted to be involved in sports.

It was known from the beginning, that Aleksandr Karelin, representative of the Novosibirsk Oblast in Russian State Duma, plans investing in sports complex “Sport-City” in Gyumri, Armenia (“Sport-City” was planned as a town with 1500 workplaces). Grant Petrosyan treated A. Karelin as a close friend (in 2008 he attended anniversary of “Karelin-Fund”, later, however, he claimed, that his meeting with Aleksandr Karelin  to discuss “Sport-City” matters was arranged by Mnac Iskandaryan, Olympic champion of 1992, working as couch in Novosibirsk).

As the 102nd Military Base in Gyumri was the main Russian base in Armenia, Grant Petrosyan claimed: “we expect Russia to pay for skating rink and swimming pool, because Russians still live in Gyumri”. But why he missed the fact, while searching for investors in Novosibirsk, that his brother invested 25 million rubles (at contemporary rate) in “sports complex” in Lithuania? One piece of information from Grant Petrosyan’s lips tells us that he perfectly knew about those plans; and negotiations on “Sport-City” construction took place not only in Novosibirsk, Moscow and Yerevan, but also in Lithuania. It is not clear with whom and how, however, it came to agreement that “Karelin-Fund” will build closed swimming pool and ice skating rink. It was officially announced, that A. Karelin was influenced by fact that thousands of soldiers are stationed in the Russian 102nd Military Base in Gyumri and together with their family members it makes over 10 percent of city residents.

On March 6, 2013, a project was introduced and the office of “Gyumri-City” fund was opened to coordinate the project further. Grant Petrosyan and Russia’s Consul General Vasiliy Korchmar also attended the presentation. No one asked a question, why a construction project of year 2007 was abandoned for 5-6 years? According to Russia’s Consul, he met with Grant Petrosyan many times before and discussed questions related to obligations from Russia’s side. The total estimated budget was 25 million dollars. President of the fund Ara Abramyan announced, that Russian businessmen and prominent sports funds came to an agreement. Sport-City Facebook page appeared on the same day.

Shadows of Russian Parliament Member.

“Karelin-Fund” was a perfect solution for opaque financial support, because it constantly was under surveillance of Russian law enforcement and FSB (favor in exchange of favor). Founders of the fund had a financial group. „Accept” bank was also partially controlled by one of the cofounders. A story below confirms this claim. In 2012, Vladimir Gorohov (former Karelin’s assistant, who later became deputy of Regional Parliament) addressed to Russian Ministry of Finance and later, in December 2013, to General Prosecutor of Russia with a request to investigate the corporate raid on “Mashkomplekt” (logistics complex of 1 billion rubles value) initiated by members and cofoundersof „Karelin-Fund”. However, since February-July 2013, tax inspectors refused investigating this incident. Meanwhile, corporate raiding in Russia is “one of the most profitable and corrupt criminal activities. It cannot exist without corruption and without support of the government”.

On January 31, 2016, another article was published, where aforementioned businessman from Novosibirsk revealed Aleksandr Karelin’s business structure. As a deputy A. Karelin could not directly manage his business so he did it through mediators: Yuri Sereda and Yuri Tokarev who at the same time where cofounders of “Karelin-Fund”.

Even though activities of A. Karelin and cofounders of his fund were under surveillance, he did not lose trust of Vladimir Putin. Since 2001 A. Karelin was a member of Upper House of Federation Council (as a representative of United Russia political party). In August 14, 2013, he received fromthe presidentan honorary award for promoting sports, even though at that time he belonged to State Duma’s International Affairs Committee. Another interesting fact from his biography is that in 1999 Aleksandr Karelin was Sports Adviser for Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin (1994-1995 Head of FSB) and it is assumed, that he helped Boris Ivaniuzhenkov to become Minister of Sports, who was formerly known as a member of organized crime group “Rotan”.

A. Karelin retained V. Putin’s trust, even then Viktor Golubev, godfather of Karelin’s children,board member of his fund, president of “Crystal” sports holding and the man who built sport related objects in Berdsk and Iskitim was arrested, because hehad a small illegal oil refinery that earned him 270 million rubles. FSB also accused V. Golubev of money laundering (over 100 million rubles) through “Accept” bank which belonged to another cofounder of “Karelin-Fund”. A. Karelin was still in favor of the president. On December 28, 2015, he visited military airport near Latakia and together with Colonel General and Commander-in-Chief Viktor Bondarev greeted Russian soldiers in Syria.

Sport-City near Gyumri Military Base.

Finally, Gyumri city provided 12.5 ha of land for free. Since that day Grant Petrosyan became an active supporter of Russian and Armenian relationship and he often emphasized the close collaboration between Russian and Gyumri as there was the 102th military base located in the city. Moreover, the FSB Directorate in Russian military base in Gyumri monitors military personnel and their environment. And very little happens in that environment without their knowledge.

On December 2, 2013, President of Russia Vladimir Putin visited Gyumri military base. He was satisfied, that Armenia finally terminated all negotiations with the European Union on increasing gas import. Meanwhile in Lithuania the last “crusades” were initiated against liquid gas terminal construction and energy independence… Who do you think were initiators of these crusades?

Source – www.arvydasanusauskas.lt

2016-09-14