ANKARA: Oktay Eksi: Our Weapon Is Freedom Of Expression

OKTAY EKSI: OUR WEAPON IS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Hurriyet, Turkey
Oct 12 2006

Has France really surprised us, or has it shown us that the
"freedom-loving" France whose image we have carried for years in
our minds is not the real thing, replaced instead by this fanatic,
anti-freedom of expression, "one truth," despotic country we now
face? It seems that we have seen the king naked for the first time.

And because of this, we are surprised.

France doesn’t see what an embarassment it is to tell people "If
you say that the Armenian genocide didn’t happen, you get 5 years
in prison and up to 45 Euro in fines." What they are saying is,
"even if you know another truth, you may not express it." What an
embarassment this is to civilization.

Look, we are not even saying "There was no slaughter of Armenians."

We do not believe that there was, but we are not going to get into
this subject right now. We are right now just looking at this incident
from the perspective of freedom of expression, and maintaining from
this moment that this bill-if accepted, which it most likely will
be-will not only be a great shame for France, but for the entire EU.

And while on the subject of the EU, I would like to draw your
attention to words spoken this week by the EU’s Commissioner in
charge of Expansion, Olli Rehn: "If this French Parliament votes
to accept this bill, I fear it will create a very non-constructive
atmosphere." Why, I ask, does Olli Rehn, who arrived in Turkey two
weeks ago demanding in no uncertain terms that Ankara remove article
301 from its penal code, water-down his words so blatantly when it
comes to France? Couldn’t he find it in himself somewhere to say
"This bill is completely opposed to freedom of expression"? Or is
the game played differently once a country is already inside the EU?

And by the way, where are the intellectuals who crow so often "Europe
is a union of culture and values"? Where is former President Giscard
d’Estaigne? Why aren’t the columns in Le Monde dealing with this
subject? France is showing that they are no longer of this age,
but have returned to being the French of the age of Inquisition,
the times when Galileo was forbade from saying that the Earth moved
around the Sun.

Don’t think that I am exaggerating. We are obliged to emerge successful
from this fight, which began with the slander about the "Armenian
genocide." This is because if we don’t, the accusation will never
be removed from our official records. And what this means-as I wrote
yesterday in this space-is that we must direct our side of this fight
very well. As Taha Akyol wrote yesterday in his column, what makes
us strong in this fight is the "freedom of expression" weapon.

But Turkey must be careful, before telling others about the shame
of their infraction against freedom of expression, to clean up its
own shames. Firsy and foremost in this realm comes our very own
Turkish Penal Code, and its article 301, forbidding the "insulting
of Turkishness."

In the end, as you can see, "freedom of expression" will be our
salvation.

BAKU: Statement By Aliyev To The Romanian Delegation

STATEMENT BY ALIYEV TO THE ROMANIAN DELEGATION

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Oct 12 2006

Dear Mr. President,

Dear members of the Romanian delegation,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Official visit of the President of Romania Mr. Traian Besescu to
Azerbaijan is very important step in mutual relations. Our countries
successfully cooperate. Romania became the second state, which has
recognized independence of Azerbaijan, and after restoration of our
state independence, we constantly feel support of Romania. And today
we see this support and we wish to express to the President of Romania,
the Romanian government our deep gratitude.

Our relations are multilateral. Now, we have intensive political
dialogue. I should note that for the last of one and a half year we
have had many meetings with Mr. Besescu. Today’s is the fourth. It
testifies that we have close enough contacts, we constantly
have consultations, wide exchange of vies. And today we had very
sincere, open negotiations, both at the meeting in private, and with
participation of delegations. Discussed were numerous questions
– bilateral relations, economic, political links, integration of
Azerbaijan to Euro-Atlantic structures and support by Romania of this
policy, large energy projects, successful oil strategy of Azerbaijan
and principles of the further cooperation. All these questions were
in the center of attention. On all these questions, we had wide
exchange of opinions, and we had no disagreements. It is the pleasant
phenomenon; it once again testifies that mutual relations are carried
out in wide format. These relations are multilateral, cover various
spheres and, certainly, create fine ground for all-around development
of our relations.

Besides, discussed were the processes ongoing in region, situation
in region, issues of strengthening safety measures. Our region
possesses huge opportunities, greater prospects. The role and
growing opportunities of Azerbaijan in cause of updating of transport
infrastructure, opening of new transport corridors, deliveries of
energy carriers to the world and European markets, strengthening of
power safety of the Europe, certainly, bring region to very important
point.

If to consider, that joint activity of regions of the Black and
Caspian seas are realities of today, then, strengthening of stability,
strengthening of security measures in region very much interest and
disturb us. These ideas have sounded at the Black Sea forum taken place
in Romania, Bucharest. Tendencies of cooperation observed in our region
set basis of regional interaction in a wide format. There is no doubt
that importance of joint efforts of Romania and Azerbaijan in this
cause is obvious. Considering all this, I wish to tell once again, that
all we are interested in establishment of peace and safety in region.

The Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh conflict is the source of
the basic threat in region. This conflict can lead to infringement of
stability in region, and it is a huge obstacle in a way of regional
cooperation. The position of Azerbaijan remains constant: Nagorno
Karabakh is the Azerbaijan land both form historical, and legal points
of view. We demand execution of four Resolutions of the United Nations
Organization on this question and unconditional withdrawal of Armenian
occupational forces from the our lands that the people ousted form
their native lands as a result of ethnic cleaning pursued by Armenian
politicians against Azerbaijanis, could return to their homes. That
the consequences of policy of ethnic cleaning have been eliminated,
and the question has found its solution on the basis of norms and
principles of international law.

Azerbaijan recognizes territorial integrity of all countries and,
certainly, demands recognition of its territorial integrity. I can
tell that the world, except for Armenia, recognizes territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan has entered the United Nations
Organization together with Nagonro Karabakh. Therefore, the question
can find solution exclusively in a legal plane, and our position
remains constant. For safety of Armenians living in Nagorno Karabakh,
various measures can be taken. We already spoke, I wish to repeat
it and today, that Nagorno Karabakh can be given the status of high
autonomy in structure of Azerbaijan. However, questions of annexation
of Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia, creation in territory of Azerbaijan of
the second Armenian state are not and will not be theme of discussion.

The position of Romania on the given question pleases, and
inspires us. The position of Romania has found reflection in
the Joint Declaration signed today. We are very grateful to the
Romanian government, the President of Romania for this position,
this approach. Such position should extend on all conflicts. All
conflicts can find solution as a result of a single approach, without
any exception.

If there will be any exception, his can lead to very bitter
conclusions. In the world, in Europe, in our region, there are similar
conflicts and if it will find solution on some principles but not
on the international law, the entire region will suffer from this. I
reiterate and consider that Azerbaijan’s position plays principle role
in settlement of the question, and our position is supported. We feel
this support and this support gradually grows.

I would hope that Azerbaijan joining the European Neighboring Policy,
in settlement of the conflict could benefit also from Europe’s
opportunities. We much want that along with the Minsk Group,
other organizations, too, stated their positions related to this
question, and took active part in this cause. We are very pleased
that on initiative of the GUAM countries, the question of "frozen
conflicts" was put on the agenda of the 61st session of the General
Assembly of the United Nations. The State of Romania has disclosed its
position in this question, has supported position of Azerbaijan and
GUAM countries. I repeat that all these are evidence to our sincere
relations, and current visit of the Romanian President to Azerbaijan
will strengthen our relations much more. We wish it, and we want it.

Romania is our close and friendly country. I am confident that our
relations will further widen, deepen and our peoples will become
closer. Thank you.

Turkey Urged To Acknowledge Armenian Killings As Genocide

TURKEY URGED TO ACKNOWLEDGE ARMENIAN KILLINGS AS GENOCIDE

Evening Echo, Ireland
Oct 12 2006

French presidential hopeful Segolene Royal said that Turkey must
recognise the mass killing of Armenians early last century as a
genocide if it hopes to join the European Union.

Royal, a Socialist, also said she was in favour of a bill to go
before France’s parliament today that would make it a crime to deny
that the killings amounted to genocide.

Turkish anger over the bill forced a delay in the initial debate, which
had been set for May, as politicians caved in to warnings by Turkish
authorities that bilateral ties would suffer if the bill became law.

Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gul said France would compromise
its values if the measure became law.

"We’ve done everything we can," Gul said. "If this passes Turkey will
lose nothing, but France will first lose Turkey…It will turn into a
country that throws people in jail for expressing their thoughts, for
expressing their ideas, for stating what is in historical documents."

Royal, a politician hoping for the Socialist Party’s nomination
as 2007 presidential candidate, aligned herself with the official
stance that Turkey must recognise the killings as genocide if it
wants EU membership.

"It is obvious that if Turkey wants to confirm its candidacy and one
day enter Europe, it is obvious that it must recognise the Armenian
genocide," she said at a news conference called to set out her
positions on Europe.

She added that she was for the legislation going before parliament.

"We have no lessons to give anyone and, at the same time, something
has to be done."

About 40 Turkish demonstrators gathered at Place de la Concorde,
facing the National Assembly, to denounce the bill making it a crime
to deny Armenian genocide.

"The Armenian genocide is an imperialist lie," said Yalcin Buyukdagh,
who identified himself as the presidential counsel of the Workers
Party in Turkey.

"If France votes yes to this law, it will have officially taken a
position as an enemy of Turkey," he said.

Politicians in Ankara, looking to retaliate against Paris, discussed
proposals to recognise an "Algerian genocide" during France’s colonial
rule there, which ended in 1962 after a brutal war.

Armenians claim that as many as 1.5 million people were killed between
1915 and 1923 in an organised campaign to force them out of eastern
Turkey. Turkey contends that a large number of people died in civil
unrest during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

EU Receives Last Warning From Ankara On French Genocide Bill

EU RECEIVES LAST WARNING FROM ANKARA ON FRENCH GENOCIDE BILL

Focus News, Bulgaria
Oct 12 2006

Ankara. The agenda in Ankara is focused on the debates and the voting
at the French parliament today on the Armenian genocide bill, online
edition of Turkish newspaper Sabah reads.

The messages sent to the European capitals stress on the thesis that
‘the Turkish people will take this as an enemy act’. It is also
stressed that ‘this initiative on the part of France, which is one
of EU’s locomotives, will further reduce the trust of the Turkish
community in the bloc and this will become the reason for the EU to
lose Turkey’.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry implied that if the bill is adopted the
dissatisfaction and criticism in Turkey ‘might come out of hand’.

Diplomatic sources point out that the reaction towards France will
be defined one step at a time depending on how the situation develops.

If the bill is adopted at first all the contacts between the two
countries will be severed and the bilateral relations will be reduced
to a ‘minimal level’.

Among the measures that ‘will be taken in time’ will be France’s
non-admission to take part in the bid on the construction of the
first nuclear power plant in Turkey, Sabah notes.

NYT; Turkish Writer Wins Nobel in Literature

Turkish Writer Wins Nobel in Literature

By SARAH LYALL
Published: October 12, 2006

LONDON, Oct. 12 – The Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk, whose exquisitely
constructed, wistful prose explores the agonized dance between Muslims
and the west and between past and present, won the 2006 Nobel Prize in
Literature today.

Announcing the award from Stockholm, the Swedish Academy said in a
statement that Mr. Pamuk’s `quest for the melancholic soul of his
native city’ had led him to discover `new symbols for the clash and
interlacing of cultures.’

Mr. Pamuk, 54, is Turkey’s best-known and best-selling novelist but
also an increasingly divisive figure in a nation pulled in many
directions at once. A champion of freedom of speech at a time when
insulting `Turkishness’ is a criminal offense, he has run afoul of
Islamists who resent his Western secularism, and Turkish nationalists
who object to his unflinching, sometimes unflattering portrayal of
their country.

The Swedish Academy never offers nonliterary reasons for its choices
and presents itself as being uninfluenced by politics. But last year’s
winner, the British playwright Harold Pinter, is a prominent critic of
the British and American governments, and there were political
implications once again in the choice of Mr. Pamuk.

`You’re beginning to notice a certain sensitivity to trends – they are
giving the prize as a symbolic statement for one thing or another,’
Arne Ruth, former editor-in-chief of the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter,
said in an interview. Of Mr. Pamuk, he said: `he is a symbol of the
relationship between Europe and Turkey, and they couldn’t have
overlooked this when they made their choice.’

Mr. Pamuk, who said in 2004 that he has begun `to get involved in a
sort of political war against the Turkish state and the
establishment,’ is currently spending a semester teaching at Columbia
University in New York.

Nationalist Turks have not forgiven Mr. Pamuk for an interview with a
Swiss magazine in 2005 in which he denounced the mass killings of
Armenians by the Ottoman Empire in World War I and the killing of
Kurds by Turkey in the 1980’s. He narrowly escaped trial when the
remarks were deemed anti-Turkish and a group of nationalists initiated
a criminal case against him; the charges were dropped on a
technicality last January. Accepting a literary award in Germany in
2005, he said: "The fueling of anti-Turkish sentiment in Europe is
resulting in an anti-European, indiscriminate nationalism in Turkey."

Because of the deeply mixed feelings Mr. Pamuk inspires back home,
some prominent Turks had to walk a fine line today, expressing pride
while trying to play down the significance of his political views.

`I want to believe that the Nobel Prize was given to him purely on his
literary talents, but not political declarations,’ Egemen Bagis, a
member of Parliament from the ruling Justice and Development party,
said. At the same time, Mr. Bagis said that the prize `shows how far
Turkey has come in its contribution to the world’s arts and
literature.’

In a brief interview with the Swedish newspaper Svenska Daglabet,
Mr. Pamuk said today that he was `very happy and honored’ and trying
`to recover from the shock.’

Born to a wealthy, secular family of industrialists in Istanbul in
195, Mr. Pamuk originally meant to be an architect. But he defied
family pressures, quit architecture school and became instead a
full-time writer, publishing his first novel, `Cevdet Bey and Sons,’
about three generations of a family, in 1982.

Among his best known works is `My Name is Red.’ The novel, first
published in Turkey in 1998 and subsequently translated into 24
languages, introduced Mr. Pamuk to a wider audience and cemented his
international reputation. Set over nine winter days in 16th-century
Istanbul, it is at once a mystery, an intellectual puzzle and a
romance with a range of narrators, including a murder victim who opens
the novel by saying, `I am nothing but a corpse now, a body at the
bottom of a well.’ In 2003, it won the $127,000 IMPAC Dublin literary
prize.

`Nothing changed in my life since I work all the time,’ Mr. Pamuk said
at the time. `I’ve spent 30 years writing fiction. For the first 10
years, I worried about money and no one asked me how much money I
made. The second decade I spent money and no one was asking me about
that. And I’ve spent the last 10 years with everyone expecting to hear
how I spend the money, which I will not do.’

`Snow,’ published in the United States in 2004, expands further on
themes – alienation, religion, modernization, the hidden corners of
Turkey – that Mr. Pamuk has explored over and over in his
work. Writing in the New York Times Book Review, Margaret Atwood
called the novel `not only an engrossing feat of tale-spinning, but
essential reading for our times.’ The Turkish public reads
Mr. Pamuk’s work, she said, `as if taking its own pulse.’

Ms. Atwood continued: `The twists of fate, the plots that double back
on themselves, the trickiness, the mysteries that recede as they’re
approached, the bleak cities, the night prowling, the sense of
identity lost, the protagonist in exile – these are vintage Pamuk, but
they’re also part of the modern literary landscape.’

Mr. Pamuk was quick to denounce the fatwa against Salman Rushdie over
Mr. Rushdie’s work `The Satanic Verses.’ In 1998, he turned down the
title of state artist in Turkey, saying, `I don’t know why they tried
to give me the prize.’

Mr. Pamuk’s Nobel comes at a particularly tricky moment for Turkey,
whose efforts to join the European Union are viewed with suspicion by
its own nationalists, by Europeans who worry about the country’s high
proportion of Islamists, and by European governments, who are
insisting that it first adhere to Western standards in human rights
and justice.

Coincidentally today, a bill that would make it a crime to deny that
the Turkish killing of Armenians from 1915 to 1917 constituted
genocide was passed in the lower house of the French Parliament. And
from Armenia, the foreign minister, Vartan Oskanian, praised what he
said were Mr. Pamuk’s courageous words about the past, in a statement
that is bound to irritate Turkey.

`Orhan Pamuk ventured into issues of memory and identity, and with
intellectual courage and honesty, explored his own history, and
therefore ours,’ Mr. Oskanian said in an e-mail message to The New
York Times. `We welcome this decision and only wish that this kind of
intellectual sincerity and candor will lead the way to acknowledging
and transcending this painful, difficult period of our peoples’ and
our countries’ history.’

Reporting was contributed by Ivar Ekman from Stockholm, C.J. Chivers
from Moscow, Nina Bernstein from New York and Sebnem Arsu from
Istanbul.

Why French MPs passed Armenian genocide bill

Last Updated: Thursday, 12 October 2006, 22:47 GMT 23:47 UK

Why French MPs passed Armenian genocide bill

By Clive Myrie
BBC News, Paris

A dictionary will tell you that genocide is the organised killing of a
people to end their collective existence.

Because of its scope, it requires central planning and a machinery to
implement it.

Genocide was clearly Adolf Hitler’s aim – it was also what the Hutus
of Rwanda desired in 1994.

There are many Turks who will not deny hundreds of thousands of
Armenians were killed in 1915 during a resettlement programme to other
parts of the Ottoman Empire.

But people died, they say, in inter-communal warfare – it was not the
organised killing of a people to end their collective existence. It
was not genocide.

There are many others around the world who beg to differ but some here
in France want to enshrine their view in law.

The lower house of parliament has approved a bill making it a crime to
deny Armenians suffered genocide. No other country has tried this, so
why are the French doing so now?

"Everything is politics" they say and for critics of the French
initiative that is exactly what the controversy is about – politics.

Wooing voters

The bill was proposed by the minority Socialists in the French
Parliament.

There is a presidential election next year and cynics say pushing for
a law criminalising denial of an Armenian genocide plays well with
Armenians here who vote.

Jack Lang, a Socialist MP, believes he knows what is going on and has
broken ranks.

"I believe the Socialist party has adopted an electoralist point of
view. It is not sincere. It is only to get the electoral support of
the Armenian community."

Cynics say there are others whom those who put forward the bill want
to impress: the majority of French people who do not want Turkey
joining the European Union.

Indeed many French politicians agree a mainly Muslim country has no
place in the EU and this may be driving the anti-Turkish bill.

Cross-party support

But is cynicism over the motives behind the bill fair?

For many French politicians denying the Armenian genocide is like
denying the Holocaust and it was not just Socialists who supported the
bill.

They were joined by a number of centre-right politicians too.

Herve Mariton of the ruling UMP party said:

"The genocide is a fact. It is an absolute disgrace for the 20th
Century, it is an absolute disgrace for humanity, it has to be stated
as such."

The government of President Jacques Chirac is in a difficult position.

He has suggested Turkish recognition of the Armenian genocide should
be a pre-condition of entry into the EU, but he has distanced his
government from the bill.

Principle

Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin says it is a bad idea and insists
France wants strong ties with Turkey.

French businesses fear trade will suffer. Exports to Turkey were worth
4.66bn euros last year.

That is why ultimately the bill will never become law.

It has to go to the Senate for a vote and with the government’s
majority in the upper house, it is highly unlikely to pass.

Gesture politics then and a cry from the heart by MPs who believe it
was genocide, or is all this politicking?

And does it make sense to criminalise Armenian genocide denial anyway?

French jails would be overcrowded with Turks, proud of their history.

Those in favour of the bill emphatically say yes, the horrors of the
past must not be forgotten or denied.

The new bill is not about politics, they say, but principle.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6046352.stm

ACNIS Focuses on Regional Developments and Armenian Security

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 0033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 10) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 10) 52.48.46
Email: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:

October 12, 2006

ACNIS Focuses on Regional Developments and Armenian Security

Yerevan–Does the future of the Caucasus augur any changes in terms of
politico-military and geostrategic interests? What is the current balance of
interests held by world powers and the countries in the region, and what are
the prospects of this balance? What can we anticipate from the GUAM
pact–signed among Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova–which is now
becoming more active? What impact will the events unraveling in the northern
Caucasus as well as the strained Russian-Georgian relations have on Armenia
and, more specifically, on the resolution of the Karabagh conflict? In light
of the on-ground victory in Artsakh’s quest for liberty and self-defense,
what are the reasons behind subsequent Armenian setbacks in the political
arena? In order comprehensively to explore and offer an expert outlook on
these and other pertinent contemporary issues, the Armenian Center for
National and International Studies (ACNIS) today convened a foreign policy
roundtable entitled "Political Developments in the Caucasus and Armenia’s
Security."

ACNIS director of research Stiopa Safarian greeted the audience with opening
remarks. Next to welcome the participants and deliver comments was ACNIS
director of administration Karapet Kalenchian. "In this policy seminar, we
will try to delineate the realm of those matters which have a direct
correlation with our security, and to expose the shortcomings of our foreign
and domestic agenda with respect to the defense of national interests," he
said.

In her address, security specialist Naira Hambarian deliberated on the
imperatives of Armenia’s security doctrine. In Hambarian’s assessment,
ethnic conflicts and civil wars are an outcome of the intrastate and
military changes taken place during the post-Cold War era. And these
changes, in their turn, bring about corruption, poverty, environmental
pollution, drug trafficking, terrorism, and other challenges to domestic,
non-military security. According to the analyst, the most perilous of these,
one which breaks the backbone of the country’s potential and destroys the
body politic, is corruption–and especially the crimes committed by the
ruling powers. "The union between criminal forces and the political elite is
beneficial for both. Hence, such criminal partnership provides votes and
financial dividends to the authorities, while the criminal factions not only
receive protection against law enforcement but, enjoying the backing of the
administration, are also free to engage in the shadow economy," Hambarian
noted.

In his turn, Yerevan State University lecturer Aram Harutiunian concentrated
on the policy, pursued by some, of Armenia’s regional isolation and its
probable consequences. He expressed confidence that the currently tense
situation in the Caucasus has brought forth real threats against Armenia’s
security, and these threats, in Harutiunian’s view, could become more
complex. "’Thanks to’ the persistent policy conducted by a couple of
aggressive neighbors, the transnational corporations, and large financial
circles, Armenia–lacking in natural resources and coping with a
cleverly-orchestrated blockade–has become largely isolated. In actual fact,
Armenia has been deprived of the opportunity to play any meaningful role in
the region. That is to say, this situation creates an evident vacuum which,
as is known, could result in unpredictable consequences," he said. The
political scientist concluded by offering his prescriptions for the
challenges ahead. The bypassing of Armenia in regional projects, according
to Harutiunian, is a dangerous process that could disturb the strategic
equilibrium in the region, and this would significantly jeopardize Armenia’s
future security.

The next speaker, political analyst Davit Petrosian, reflected on the
current instability in the northern Caucasus, and presented a breakdown of
the threats which Armenia might confront from that direction. "Should the
Karabagh conflict be settled, one of the points in the relevant agreement
will stipulate the deblockage of every single one of Armenia’s land
communications, including the transportation links that pass through
Azerbaijan and the northern Caucasus," Petrosian asserted. He did not rule
out, however, that in case of instability in the southern portion of the
North Caucasus–in Daghestan, for instance–the aforementioned routes could
be shut down once more, but this time by Russia. The transportation links
across Abhkazia and North Ossetia, on the other hand, will remain closed for
a long time in order to serve as reciprocal levers in the campaign against
neighboring adversaries, he said.

In his talk, Armenia’s former deputy minister of defense Vahan Shirkhanian
examined the military balance in the Caucasus. He demonstrated with facts
and figures that the South Caucasus is the world’s most militarized region.
In line with these statistics, in the last five years alone the military
budgets of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia have increased approximately
five, three, and two times, respectively. And what’s interesting is that
these indicators surpass the economic growth index of these countries by
thirty to forty times. Apart from this, the three Caucasus countries have
found themselves in different geopolitical and politico-military
extremities. Georgia’s bearing is in the direction of NATO, Azerbaijan looks
toward Turkey, while Armenia sets its sights on Russia. "It seems the region
will soon turn into a stage for military actions," Shirkhanian said. He also
maintained against this backdrop that Armenia needs to resign from its
policy of complementarity, which practically has become unjustifiable, and
to choose a precise and coherent system of security. The best course of
action for Armenia, according to the former deputy minister, is to associate
with the Eurasian Economic Commonwealth and with the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization comprising Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and
Tajikistan.

The participants in the ensuing discussion included director Gagik
Ter-Harutiunian of the "Noravank" Foundation; Gegham Harutiunian from the
Republic Party; analyst Marine Karapetian from the Concord Center for Legal
and Political Studies; Heritage Party board member Gevorg Kalenchian;
chairman Alexander Butayev of "The People are Masters of the Country" civic
union; and several others.

Founded in 1994 by Armenia’s first Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi K.
Hovannisian and supported by a global network of contributors, ACNIS serves
as a link between innovative scholarship and the public policy challenges
facing Armenia and the Armenian people in the post-Soviet world. It also
aspires to be a catalyst for creative, strategic thinking and a wider
understanding of the new global environment. In 2006, the Center focuses
primarily on civic education, conflict resolution, and applied research on
critical domestic and foreign policy issues for the state and the nation.

For further information on the Center call (37410) 52-87-80 or 27-48-18; fax
(37410) 52-48-46; email [email protected] or [email protected]; or visit

www.acnis.am
www.acnis.am

World Sight Day 2006 celebration in Yerevan

PRESS RELEASE

October 12, 2006

American University of Armenia Corporation
300 Lakeside Drive
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: 510-987-9125
Fax: 510-208-3576
Contact: Maggie Mead
E-mail: [email protected]

World Sight Day 2006 celebration in Yerevan

Yerevan, Armenia (12.10.2006) – Established in 1999, the Garo Meghrigian Eye
Institute for Preventive Ophthalmology (GMEIPO), located at the Center for
Health Service Research and Development of the American University of
Armenia, aims to eliminate avoidable blindness in Armenia. The GMEPO team
joined the worldwide advocacy campaign and celebration of World Sight Day in
Armenia on October 12. The celebrations occurred at the Boarding School for
Visually Impaired Children in Yerevan (BSVIC), the only educational facility
of its type in Armenia.

The theme of this year’s World Sight Day (WSD) was Low Vision and Refractive
Error, highlighting the fact that millions are functionally blind due to
uncorrected refractive error. While most of these cases cannot be prevented
or cured medically, much can be done to improve patients’ quality of life
and prevent effective blindness.

According to Naira Khachatryan (Lecturer of Preventive Ophthalmology,
College of Health Sciences, AUA), "On the 11th and 12th of October, 2006,
GMEIPO organized detailed eye screening of 108 students of BSVIC. All
children in need were provided with prescribed eyeglasses of high quality,
as well as with recommendations for further treatment/rehabilitation. We
also donated 500 writing books for blind children to support the teaching
process at the School. In order to improve preventive/regular eye care, our
team donated equipment and other supplies to the eye care facilities at the
BSVIC, and offered training to ophthalmic personnel."

The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 37 million people
worldwide are blind and an additional 124 million have vision impairment.
Childhood blindness is a significant problem, with an estimated 1.4 million
blind children below 15 years old. In order to raise awareness about
blindness and vision impairment, World Sight Day is celebrated on the second
Thursday of October each year.

——————————————- —————————-
The American University of Armenia Corporation (AUAC) is registered as a
non-profit organization in the United States and as the Armenian University
of Armenia Fund (AUAF) in Armenia .The American University of Armenia (AUA)
is affiliated through AUAC with the Regents of the University of California.
Receiving major support from the AGBU, AUA offers instruction leading to the
Masters Degree in eight graduate programs. For more information about AUA,
visit

www.aua.am.

New Monument In Yerevan To Unite Memory Of Armenian Genocide And Hol

NEW MONUMENT IN YEREVAN TO UNITE MEMORY OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AND HOLOCAUST VICTIMS

PanARMENIAN.Net
12.10.2006 14:22 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ October 27 the Jewish community of Armenia will
open a new monument to victims of the Holocaust at the Ring Park
in Yerevan. In the words of head of the Jewish community of Armenia
Rimma Varzhapetyan, the new monument is a rare one, as it is dedicated
not only to the Jewish Holocaust, but also to victims of the Armenian
Genocide. "We are very grateful to Armenian authorities for providing a
lot for the monument," she said. A large number of guests from various
countries will arrive for the opening of the monument. A round table
discussion of consequences of genocides in 20th century will be
arranged. "We want to prove once again that Jews living in Armenia
work for doing useful deeds. We hope that no malefactor will dare to
profane this memorial," head of the Jewish community of Armenia said,
reports the Azg.

French MPs Back Armenia Genocide Bill, Turkey Angry

French MPs Back Armenia Genocide Bill, Turkey Angry

By REUTERS
Published: October 12, 2006
Filed at 1:31 p.m. ET

PARIS (Reuters) – France’s lower house of parliament approved a bill
on Thursday making it a crime to deny Armenians suffered genocide at
the hands of Ottoman Turks, provoking anger in Turkey and raising
fresh doubts about its EU ambitions.

Ankara said the vote would damage ties between the two NATO allies and
French firms operating in Turkey feared they would suffer an immediate
backlash.

“This will be an unforgettable shame on France. France can never
describe itself as a country of freedoms again,” said Turkish Foreign
Minister Abdullah Gul.

Turkey denies accusations some 1.5 million Armenians were massacred
during the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire in World War One,
arguing that Armenian deaths were a part of general partisan fighting
in which both sides suffered.

The French government distanced itself from Thursday’s bill, calling
it “unnecessary and untimely,” and indicated that it might never
become law as it still needs to be ratified by both the upper house
Senate and French president.

But Turkish officials, fearing a nationalist backlash that could put
the pro-European Ankara government on the defensive, said the damage
had already been done.

The legislation calls for a one-year prison term and 45,000 euro
($56,570) fine for anyone denying the 1915 genocide — the same
sanction as for denying the Nazi genocide of Jews.

“Does a genocide committed in World War One have less value than a
genocide committed in World War Two? Obviously not,” Philippe
Pomezec, a parliamentarian with the ruling Union for a Popular
Movement (UMP), said during the debate.

Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan hailed the vote as a
“natural continuation of France’s principled and consistent defense
of human and historic rights and values.”

HOSTAGE TO POLITICS

However, analysts saw the move more as a play for Armenian diaspora
votes in next year’s presidential election and said it highlighted how
easily Turkey’s EU candidacy can become a hostage to domestic politics
in EU member states.

“It is the intention of those French politicians who backed this bill
to antagonize Turkey, to push it to the limit and force it to throw in
the towel,” said Cengiz Candar, an EU expert at Istanbul’s Bahcesehir
University.

Some 60 protesters carried a black wreath down Istanbul’s main
commercial street on Thursday and laid it in front of the French
consulate.

Most French people oppose Turkey joining the 25-nation bloc and fear
over its potential membership was one of the reasons why France voted
last year to reject the EU constitution.

Anti-Turkish feeling was palpable as lawmakers left parliament on
Thursday. Influential UMP politician Patrick Devedjian, himself of
Armenian descent, said Muslim Turkey was not a democratic country and
did not deserve EU membership.

“It is like they are asking to enter a club but have already smashed
its windows,” he told Reuters television.

The European Commission warned France that its bill could hinder
efforts to end decades of dispute over the killings and noted that
criteria for talks on Turkey’s possible EU entry did not include
recognition of the Armenian killings as genocide.

An hour after the vote, Turkey’s best-known novelist, Orhan Pamuk, won
the Nobel prize for Literature.

Pamuk recently went on trial for insulting “Turkishness” after
telling a Swiss newspaper nobody in Turkey dared mention the Armenian
massacres. The court eventually dropped charges.

French businesses fear trade will suffer because of the row, with
French exports to Turkey worth 4.66 billion euros in 2005.

“Time will show. But I cannot say it will not have any
consequences,” Turkish Economics Minister Ali Babacan told reporters
in Brussels.