BY TYLER DURDEN,

One week ago, when the Turkish Lira first tumbled below 20 against the USD, we warned that much more pain was in stock based on a rather dire analysis by Goldman of the central bank’s reserve position, a much more ominous factor for the coming currency collapse then Erdogan’s reelection.

Since then it’s gone from bad to worse, with Reuters also jumping on the bearish lira bandwagon and reporting that the Turkish central bank’s net forex reserves dropped into negative territory for the first time since 2002, standing at $-151.3 million on May 19, as the bank – following Erdogan’s strict orders – scrambled to counter demand for hard currencies (USD, gold, crypto) ahead of Sunday’s runoff vote.

Forex demand in Turkey surged to record levels ahead of May 14 on companies’ and individuals’ expectations that the lira, which lost 44% in 2021 and 30% in 2022, will plunge after the vote (spoiler alert: those fears have been justified).

As we discussed last week, the central bank’s forex reserves have sagged in recent years due to costly market interventions and other efforts to cool forex demand.  The bank’s net reserves dropped by $2.48 billion in the week to May 19, to their lowest level since February 2002. They have dropped $27.7 billion since the end of 2022, and were at negative $3 billion as of May 19. The net forex reserves would be even more negative if outstanding swaps, courtesy of foreign central banks and which stood at $33.50 billion on Wednesday, are deducted (as they should be since the CBRT will have to repay these at some point).

Iain Muir ,

The Pechersk District Court of Kyiv issued a ruling to oblige the Ukrainian State Bureau of Investigation to start a pre-trial investigation in connection with the possible treason of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, former Verkhovna Rada deputy Geo Leros said on May 30 in his Telegram channel.

“Let me remind you that the pocket SBI refused to investigate Zelenskyy’s high treason when he appointed FSB agents to key positions in the SBU, but we were obliged by the court to enter information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations and begin a pre-trial investigation,” the former deputy said.

He cited a photograph of a copy of the ruling of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv, by which the court obliges the State Bureau of Investigation to conduct a pre-trial investigation at the request of Leros. In his message on the Telegram channel, the deputy clarified that the court ordered to initiate a criminal case “against Zelensky and co” under Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (high treason).

According to Mr Leos, Zelenskyy himself, the head of the presidential office Andriy Yermak, his deputy Roman Mashovets, as well as the ex-chairman of the SBU Ivan Bakanov and the former deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Ruslan Demchenkoare the main defendants, thanks to whom FSB agents were allegedly appointed to the special services.

According to Mr Leros, these appointments have led to tens of thousands of dead Ukrainians. The MP demanded that the traitors be held accountable for serious crimes against the Ukrainian people.

Scotland Today Online has contacted the Ukrainian Embassy in London for Official Comment on this serious development. We will provide any information if and when we receive it.

Iain Muir

Scottish/British Photojournalist – Researcher – Pilot (A&H) – CAA Licensed Drone Operator – Commentator – NUJ Member – SCTS Registered

This person does not realize that he has problems with understanding. I ask for proof: “There are countries that have the most powerful armies, but this does not ensure their external security, because there is no peace.

The only guarantor of external security is peace. Anything else does not guarantee external security.” I assume that the speech of the person clinging to the position of RA Prime Minister is primarily about Israel. The latter has one of the most powerful armies in the world, but that country has a problem in terms of external security. However, the reason for this is not the lack of peace, but another phenomenon. It is that the existence of the state of Israel does not help our friend Iran.

At the same time, the so-called Palestinian Arabs, who have appeared in the historical territories of that country since the early Middle Ages, want to build their statehood at the expense of those territories. And the leadership of the state of Israel, unlike Nikol Pashinyan, does not want to cede its territories. And he is trying to ensure security not at the expense of ceding territory, but by strengthening the country’s defense capability. Because in case of ceding territory, the end of that demand will not be seen, which is a natural phenomenon. And will not get external security guaranteed by peace, but the destruction of the state. Because it is not peace that guarantees external security, but peace is guaranteed by providing external security.

And if indeed “uncertainty is the #1 formulator and definition of international politics”, then the challenges it brings must be faced. And not, as he thinks, just trying to understand the “deep processes of global processes”. But, as it appears, he does not understand the reason for the changes in Aliyev’s rhetoric even after observing the deep processes. And I have to explain to “honorable Mr. Pashinyan” that this is happening as a result of constant concessions by RA to Azerbaijan under his patronage. The more he gives in, the more Ilham demands. And its end will come not with the signing of a piece of paper called a peace treaty, but with the abolition of the state of Armenia. And in that case, real peace will be established in our region, until the moment when problems start to arise with neighboring Georgia.

And one more thing. when the process of unipolar world becoming bipolar takes place, no piece of paper, whatever name it bears, can have a long life. And in that sense, our republic is in the most vulnerable position. Which has been in the Russian security system since independence. However, thanks to his prime ministership, he is gradually deprived of that roof. And now he is trying to get the support of the enemy of that system. Which will not lead to mechanical changes in security systems, but shocks. What will happen on our heads and at our expense? As far as I understand, a person trying to perceive deep processes simply does not realize it. And one additional piece of information. the world change did not start with the 44 day war of 2020. It started earlier, with the second Ukrainian “Maidan” in 2014. And it continues in that direction until today. And the second Artsakh war with our defeat under his command was one of the non-key manifestations of that process.

P.S. For example, I would be ashamed that, being the prime minister of the country, I do not cope with deep geopolitical processes. And I would resign from the post of Prime Minister. But, as you can see, this was not said for him: he is irreplaceable and unchangeable…

Vakhtang Siradeghyan

In the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, instead of protecting the interests of Karabakh, the Armenian leadership preferred to retreat and recognize without reservation the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan within the borders of the former Azerbaijan SSR.

Konstantin Zatulin, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee for CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration and Relations with Compatriots of the Russian State Duma, told this to Rusarminfo.

“It was emphasized during the meetings held in the West last year and confirmed there, in the West and during the recent meetings in Moscow,” he emphasized.

In this connection, Zatulin recalled that the issue of self-determination of the Armenian people of Nagorno-Karabakh and the issue of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh have been the subject of talks for many years. The leadership of Armenia argues about other issues, but not about the issue of status, the Russian lawmaker noted.

He recalled the statements by Armenia’s leadership before the Moscow meeting, particularly about being a member in the CSTO.

“It all paints a very worrying picture for Russia as it struggles to maintain its presence [in Nagorno-Karabakh]. Certainly, one of the most important issues—moreover, not only for Russia, but primarily for the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh—is the issue of the future presence of Russian peacekeeping contingent in Nagorno-Karabakh,” Zatulin added.

“I believe you don’t have to be far-sighted to imagine that despite all the bows and compliments, the Azerbaijani side will seek to push the Russian peacekeepers out from Nagorno-Karabakh as soon as the agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan is signed, in order to finally resolve for itself the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict issue related to it, stop calling it ‘Nagorno-Karabakh,’ as they are already doing. They implement their political line [towards Karabakh Armenians]: ‘get Azerbaijani citizenship or leave!’ What makes this line different from the Armenian Genocide of the beginning of the 20th century is that it does not imply direct physical annihilation,” he said.

“But as we recall, the Armenian Genocide was accompanied by the mass displacement of Armenians from the places of historical residence in the Armenian provinces of Turkey. Azerbaijan is now striving for it, and they don’t need witnesses; they don’t need Russia and its peacekeeping forces,” Zatulin said.

“The hopes that someone is perhaps artificially creating that the West has joined the process, they do not take into account the fact that the main interest of the West is to cause damage in the region; first of all, to Russia, and secondly to Iran. Both are being implemented,” he added.

“Russia’s influence in Armenia is under question. And as for Iran, the West will turn a blind eye to many things, including the deportation of [Karabakh] Armenians if Azerbaijan enters into a more active confrontation with Iran. Azerbaijan follows this path as it realizes what the issue is. Every week, another batch of Iranian spies is exposed in Iran. Anti-Iranian hysteria is being sown there. Who is interested in aggravation of relations? First of all, the US, Israel,” said Zatulin.

Inal Ardzinba, occupied Abkhazia’s top diplomat, has expressed concern over the recent statement by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, in which he indicated Armenia’s readiness to recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan.

Ardzinba described Pashinyan’s statement as a significant departure from previous positions and highlighted its contradiction with a resolution adopted by the Supreme Council of Armenia in 1992. Inal Ardzinba said: “Only a couple of years ago we couldn’t have imagined that the Prime Minister of Armenia would make such a statement. Moreover, in 1992 the Supreme Council of Armenia adopted a resolution that strictly forbids execution, on the territory of Armenia, of any normative legal act, whether internal or interstate, recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh as a part of Azerbaijan. Pashinyan’s statement contradicts this resolution, which is quite unprecedented”.

Ardzinba went on to emphasize the geopolitical dynamics at play and the potential consequences of Pashinyan’s statement. He stated: “We are living in an era of very rigid geopolitics. What happened to Nagorno-Karabakh is the result of a geopolitical consensus… and the consequences of which can be quite tragic. What happened to Nagorno Karabakh is a tragedy, if we recall how many human lives have been lost, and what has been the result of this.”

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said on May 22 that Armenia is ready to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Nagorno-Karabakh, after receiving guarantees for the security and protection of the rights of its people. This statement has caused dissatisfaction among the Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh population.

The US Arizona State Legislature confirmed the right of self-determination of the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) with the declaration published by the speaker of the House of Representatives of the state of Arizona, Ben Toma. This was reported by the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

“We welcome the proclamation from the Speaker of Arizona’s State Assembly recognizing Artsakh’s right to self-determination – an important step towards justice for the Armenians of Artsakh,” ANCA Board Member Zanku Armenian said.
“Amid Azerbaijan’s blockade of Artsakh, this demonstration of solidarity is a crucial part of our community’s ongoing efforts to raise awareness of this unfolding humanitarian catastrophe and ensure Azerbaijan is held accountable for its unabated aggression against the Armenian people. This proclamation is a testament to the tireless advocacy of Arizona’s Armenian-American community, and the ANCA looks forward to continuing to work alongside local activists in the state to ensure our community’s voice is heard at every level of government,” he added.
US House Rep Ben Toma affirmed support for the “Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh’s right to self-determination, and its continuing efforts to develop as a free and independent nation, in order to guarantee its citizens those rights inherent in a free and independent society; and be it further, I encourage the United States government to strengthen and solidify our country’s economic and cultural relationship with the Artsakh Republic and its citizens and continue to promote the humanitarian and economic rehabilitation of the region.”

Today, May 28, the Day of the First Republic of Armenia, the “Mother Armenia” people’s movement was created. The movement is a cross-party, in which representatives of different layers of society are involved:

political scientists, economists, diplomats, sociologists, famous intellectuals, lawyers, doctors, teachers, professors, IT specialists, journalists, bloggers, students, and representatives of small and medium businesses.

The goal is to ensure broad consolidation and protection of the national and state interests of Armenia, Artsakh, and the Armenian people by removing the current regime.
The members of the initiative group of the people’s movement “Mother Armenia” adopted a Declaration today, which we present below:

“Declaration
Initiative Group of the People’s Movement “Mother Armenia”,

– taking as a basis the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Armenia, the invariable articles of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia,

– realizing the value of the achievements of the [Artsakh] Karabakh movement in 1988,

– stating that as a result of the policy of the current RA authorities, the Constitution of our country, the decision of the RA Central Committee of July 8, 1992, are being violated, serious threats are being created for the existence of Armenia and Artsakh, and for the sovereign, safe existence and development of the Armenian people in their own homeland,

– highly valuing the spiritual and cultural heritage of the Armenian people and emphasizing the importance of a thorough reform of the educational sphere on a national basis and the implementation of cultural policy,

– considering it necessary to establish Armenia as a state of law through a judicial and legal system independent of the executive branch and consisting of people with high professional and moral qualities,
we declare:
The change of power in 2018 did not justify the fair aspirations of our people to build a prosperous, secure, more democratic state based on the rule of law. On the contrary, all we got as a result of the “velvet revolution” was war, thousands of victims, disappointment, a deceived and split society. The foundations for catastrophic developments in the Artsakh issue were laid.
The vicious phenomena of 1991-2018 have not been eradicated, and the vast majority of our citizens have become victims of populism.

The dependence of the judiciary power on the executive only deepened. The judicial and legal system has become a baton used against all opponents of the government. Political opponents of the authorities – well-known military, opposition figures – are illegally arrested. All this is accompanied by obvious and unpunished acts of disrespect, violence and killings of people by those close to power.

The promised fight against corruption, the merging of business and government, and other vicious phenomena have failed. Moreover, the “velvet revolution” gave rise to dollar millionaires. In the context of rising prices, vulnerable groups of citizens have become even more insecure – pensioners, beneficiaries, and those living on low wages. More than 40% of the country’s citizens are on the verge of poverty.

The shadow revenue has increased. An unprecedented increase in drug addiction, gambling and crime has been recorded, especially among young people. Armenia has become a participant in the international drug trade. A small part of this chain was recently uncovered in the form of cocaine for more than 1 billion euros.

The enemy appeared on the territory of Armenia, threatening the sovereignty and international subjectivity of the Republic of Armenia. Artsakh is on the verge of total annihilation. The war resulted in thousands of victims, missing people, more than 11 thousand wounded and disabled. Prisoners and other detainees continue to remain in the prisons of Baku.

The government has retracted its pre-election promise made during the snap parliamentary elections in 2021. Instead of a “peace agenda” and a policy of realizing Artsakh’s right to self-determination, we got a new war, new victims and territorial losses. The government treacherously recognizes Artsakh as a part of Azerbaijan and is ready to cede the territory of the Republic of Armenia. With its similar position, the country completely found itself in the field of political and legal illegitimacy.

As a result of the disastrous foreign policy pursued by the authorities, Armenia has become an arena for a clash of geopolitical forces. The current government has destroyed the security architecture of the state, jeopardizing relations with our strategic and natural allies.
By recognizing Artsakh as part of Azerbaijan on October 6, 2022 in Prague, the RA authorities de facto became accomplices in the liquidation of the November 9 agreements. This gave Azerbaijan the opportunity to blockade Artsakh and claim the territory of Armenia. The Berdzor corridor was closed as a result of the agreements reached in Prague.
The security systems of Armenia and Artsakh are inseparable, and their separation is fraught with tragic consequences. The thesis about the existence of one of them at the cost of sacrificing the other is not only immoral, but also false and dangerous.

The authorities are consistently splitting the Diaspora and alienating it from Mother Armenia.

Based on the foregoing, realizing the urgency of the moment, guided by high responsibility, we, the undersigned, initiate a people’s movement with the aim of consolidating wide circles of society around the following goals:

First, to form a nationwide unity in the country around the suppression of the deadly policy of the current government, preventing the destruction of Artsakh and the collapse of the Armenian security system.

Second, the movement, in its form and content, is supra-partisan. The goal of the movement is not to come to power. The primary task is to protect the national and state interests of Armenia, Artsakh and the Armenian people by removing the current regime. The government of like-minded people formed after the change of power should organize early parliamentary elections within 1 year.
Thirdly, the new prime minister must publicly declare that they will not be nominated by any party or party alliance in the upcoming parliamentary elections during their term as prime minister. Its main task should be to ensure the security environment of our country and to organize free, fair and transparent elections.

We urge to put aside party and group interests and to remove the anti-state regime through broad popular consolidation. In the current situation, a peaceful change of power is the only chance to make a historical change.

The movement is open to membership and cooperation with individuals and organizations pursuing similar goals.
Armenia, Yerevan
May 28, 2023
Members of the initiative group of the people’s movement “Mother Armenia” are:
Naira Melikyan,
Davit Sahakyants,
Avetik Ishkhanyan,
Artur Khachikyan,
Hovhannes Harutyunyan,
Dzyunik Aghajanyan,
Stepan Danielyan,
Artak Hovhannisyan,
Manuk Sukiasyan,
Boris Murazi,
Hovhannes Khudoyan,
Yervand Bozoyan,
Andranik Tevanyan

Maxinne Vlug, walks through the “open door” to consider how American public opinion swirled around the ratification of the Lausanne Treaty.

Maxinne Vlug is a History student at Utrecht University.

Although the United States sought to limit its involvement at the Lausanne Conference, it was also keen to protect its political and economic interests in the Middle East. Due to fuel shortages during the Great War and the increasing use of automobiles, many Americans feared a post-war “gasoline famine”, fears stoked by US oil majors as part of a fictional US-UK “Oil War”.

Notorious for the oily Teapot Dome scandal, Republican President Warren Harding’s administration viewed the so-called Open Door Principle, championed by Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, as a means of escaping the tentacles of a “British oil octopus” allegedly intent on cornering the United States’ oil supply. The Principle held that no single power should enjoy special economic privileges, drawing a line under the pre-war system of “spheres of influence”. It was assumed that the new Turkish Republic’s interests would align with this policy. After all, the Turks not only sought international recognition at Lausanne, but curbs on the Capitulations and other economic controls imposed under the terms of successive French, German and British loans to the Sultan.

It was unclear, however, how such support of Ismet’s beloved “sovereignty” could be squared with other American concerns, not least humanitarian ones. Neither Lausanne nor the provisional bilateral treaty of amity between the United States and Turkey intended as a stop-gap made any mention of the Armenian Genocide or the prosecution of those who might be held responsible. The establishment of diplomatic ties between the U.S. and Republican Turkey thus aroused considerable debate within the American society. Many Americans sympathized with the Armenians, contributing to missionary activities and the work of Near East Relief. For a short period in 1919 it had seemed that energy security and humanitarianism might be reconcilable, as the borders of a proposed US-administered League of Nations mandate for Armenia were drawn in such a way as to include territories then believed to hold large oil deposits. Unfortunately Congress proved to have no appetite for such an open-ended foreign entanglement.

At Lausanne, by contrast, the Turks revived a dormant 1910 railroad and oil concession granted to retired US Admiral Colby Mitchell Chester. This served as a means of luring the American delegation to put oil (the Chester Concession) before humanitarian concerns (punishment of genocidaires, creation of an Armenian National Home within Anatolia), pitting the American observers at Lausanne against their British and French allies. For the Armenians themselves, a people that already suffered so greatly, hopes invested in a Wilsonian notion of self-determination and a better future within the generous borders of a Wilsonian Armenian mandate were crushed.

NEAR EAST RELIEF, ADVERTISEMENT IN A LOCAL NEWSPAPER FROM MERIDIA, IDAHO, 4 JANUARY 1921.

The American Committee Opposed to the Lausanne Treaty and church leaders such as the Episcopalian bishop of New York, William Thomas Manning, sought to rouse public opinion against the treaty, which the Committee described as “a purposeless and humiliating surrender to a red-handed, faithless military despot,” ratification of which would “reflect upon American honor and self-respect.”[1] During the course of the 1924 presidential campaign, the Democrats argued that the treaty and the Open Door Principle betrayed the Armenian people. At the same time Democratic senator William H. King of Utah actively pleaded before the Senate against ratification. The Senator argued that Turkey’s past record did not indicate that she could be trusted to abide by treaties. “A few businessmen and the Turkish Government are carrying on extensive propaganda in the United States to secure recognition,” King claimed. “Turkey wants to borrow money and hopes that the ratification of the Lausanne treaty will enable her to negotiate a loan in the United States.” [2] Secretary of State Hughes was singled out for criticism in much of this press coverage:

Obviously, Secretary Hughes went to Lausanne fully prepared to make any and all sacrifice to clinch this oil concession, and he betrayed Christian Armenia and his own country to attain his purpose.The Atlanta Tri-Weekly Journal, 4 August 1924.

The headline of a Chicago blue-collar newspaper The Daily Worker put it more bluntly: “Turks given liberty to kill Armenians for big concessions.”[2] Other political figures and businessmen sought to minimalize the Armenian Question. Admiral Chester and his son Arthur Tremaine Chester claimed in the New York Times’ Current History that the massacres of the Armenians were a direct result of their own alleged “treachery”. “It is safe to say,” the latter wrote, “that no massacre of any importance has occurred that was not the direct result of traitorous or threatening acts by the victims.” [3] Chester Jr. then sought to ram his point home by inviting his American readers to imagine what he claimed was an analogous hypothetical:

Suppose that Mexico was a powerful and rival country with which we were at war, and suppose that we sent an army to the Mexican border to hold back the invading enemy; suppose further that not only the negroes in our army deserted to the enemy but those left at home organized and cut off our line of communication. What do you think we as a people, especially the Southerners, would do to the negroes?Arthur Tremaine Chester, “Angora and the Turks”, Current History 17.5 (Feb. 1923): 758-64 (763).

The Senate did not vote on ratification until January 1927. While the vote was favourable (50-34 in favour of ratification), this was six votes short of the requisite two-third majority. Admiral Bristol, the United States’ High Commissioner in Constantinople, was left having to reassure Ankara that the vote did not signal any desire to break off good relations, and attempting to secure another extension of a bilateral treaty of amity between the two countries. Despite this unhappy “modus vivendi”, later that year President Coolidge sent Joseph Grew to Ankara as ambassador. “Whether the Senate declares this legal or not,” noted the New York Times, “it was contended the President does not require an act of Congress to send an Ambassador to any country he chooses.”[5]

Meanwhile the Chester Concession proved to be a damp squib, even after being formally confirmed by the National Assembly in Ankara in 1923. By that point the Ottoman American Development Corporation which had taken over management of the Concession had fallen apart, thanks to disagreements among the shady characters now at the helm, which caused State Department officials such as Allen Dulles considerable embarrassment.

As for the Open Door, when it came to Middle East oil it only remained open long enough to enable a consortium of American oil companies to bluster their way (with the help of officials like Dulles) into the Turkish Petroleum Company (TPC), whose claim to the oil of the Ottoman vilayets of Mosul and Baghdad derived from another pre-war concession, secured from the ancien regime in June 1914. This international (English, Dutch, French) condominium thus gained a fourth partner. Once inside TPC, American oil executives lost interest in the Open Door, and made sure that the State Department did, too. Here again, idealism had lost out to dollars.

Notes

[1] “Atrocities Laid to Turkish Rulers”, New York Times, 17 May 1926.

[2] “Urges the Defeat of Lausanne Treaty”, New York Times, 12 April 1926.

[3] The Daily Worker, 11 June 1924.

[4] C. Chester “Turkey Reinterpreted” and A. T. Chester “Angora and the Turks”,  New York Times Current History 17.5 (1923) and 16:6 (1922).

[5] ‘Turkish Relations Upheld”, New York Times, 29 November 1927.

FEATURE IMAGE: “THE OPEN DOOR: WHAT’S THAT?”, 1922 CARTOON BY ELLISON FROM THE BIRMINGHAM MAIL.

Source: https://thelausanneproject.com/2023/05/26/an-open-and-shut-case/

“They are trying to undermine the foundations of our identity, all our national, spiritual, and cultural depths, they are trying to bring a new concept of the state and statehood, training the citizens of Armenia with their kind: pitiful, cowardly, insensitive.

” Aghvan Vardanyan, a member of the “Armenia” faction, announced during the parliamentary briefings, speaking about the RA authorities.

“Someone who destroyed and is destroying all state institutions with his henchmen speaks about the new concept of the state and statehood. Recently, he says that our parameters of the peace agreement may not be acceptable to our people, but he says that we will not hold a referendum, it will mean avoiding responsibility. He is talking about the cadastre certificate, the independence referendum, the Constitution, the UN member state says that we do not have a cadastre certificate. Who do you want a cadastre certificate from, Aliyev, because there is no other option? Armenia-Turkey borders are clear, since the Soviet Union, Armenia-Iran borders are clear, it is our western borders that the enemy violates every day. An opposition deputy tried to refresh Pashinyan’s memory by recalling the phrase “Artsakh is Armenia and that’s it.”

“After all this, if you said that there is no Armenia without Artsakh, who are you? What are you doing here? What is the reason that you don’t leave, and every day we see your sad face as a loser?” This proves one thing, this is a denial, and a renegade cannot be the leader of Armenia.”

(Los Angeles, CA)—The Armenian National Committee of America – Western Region (ANCA-Western Region) will hold a HyeVotes Candidate Forum for Los Angeles City Council District 6 Candidates Imelda Padilla and Marisa Alcaraz on Wednesday, June 7, 2023, at 7:00 pm at the Vatican Banquet Hall (6913 Van Nuys Blvd, Van Nuys, CA 91405). The event is free and open to the public.

The Candidate Forum will allow the Armenian community of Los Angeles City District 6 to hear from the two candidates on a range of issues affecting the district, including Van Nuys, Lake Balboa, Panorama City, North Hills, Arleta, and Sun Valley. The district has a significant Armenian American population and several Armenian American businesses and organizations.

During the Forum, the candidates will answer questions from the moderators and the audience on topics such as public safety, housing, transportation, education, economic development, and community relations. The Forum will also provide community members and advocates with an opportunity to learn more about the candidates’ visions and strategies for strengthening the established ties between the City of Los Angeles and Armenia, such as uplifting Artsakh’s right to extraterritorial self-determination, addressing the concerning rise of Armenophobia in Los Angeles, and ensuring the expansion of Armenian Genocide education.

The ANCA Western Region invites all interested members of the public to attend this informative and interactive event and learn more about the candidates and their positions on issues that matter to them. 

The HyeVotes initiative is the only Armenian-American campaign dedicated to educating community members about elections, empowering community members to cast their ballots, and ensuring that Armenian-Americans are represented and accommodated in all aspects of civic engagement.

The Armenian National Committee of America-Western Region is the largest and most influential Armenian-American grassroots advocacy organization in the Western United States. Working in coordination with a network of offices, chapters, and supporters throughout the Western United States and affiliated organizations around the country, the ANCA-WR advances the concerns of the Armenian American community on a broad range of issues.

ANNA GASPARYAN