Month: October 2006

THE ASSYRIANS: IGNORED AMONG FEARS OF AN IRAQI CIVIL WAR
By Charles Tannock

The Daily Star, Lebanon
Oct 4 2006

The world is consumed by fears that Iraq is degenerating into a civil
war between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. But in this looming war of all
against all, it is Iraq’s small community of Assyrian Christians that
is at risk of annihilation.

Iraq’s Christian communities are among the world’s most ancient,
practicing their faith in Mesopotamia almost since the time of
Christ. The Assyrian Apostolic Church, for instance, traces its
foundation back to 34 AD and St. Peter. Likewise, the Assyrian Church
of the East dates to 33AD and St. Thomas. The Aramaic that many of
Iraq’s Christians still speak is the language of those apostles –
and of Christ.

When tolerated by their Muslim rulers, Assyrian Christians contributed
much to the societies in which they lived. Their scholars helped usher
in the "Golden Age" of the Arab world by translating important works
into Arabic from Greek and Syriac. But in recent times, toleration
has scarcely existed.

In the Armenian Genocide of 1914-1918, 750,000 Assyrians – roughly
two-thirds of their number at the time – were massacred by the Ottoman
Turks with the help of the Kurds.

Under the Iraqi Hashemite monarchy, the Assyrians faced persecution
for co-operating with the British during the World War I. Many fled to
the West, among them the Church’s patriarch. During Saddam Hussein’s
wars against the Kurds, hundreds of Assyrian villages were destroyed,
their inhabitants rendered homeless, and dozens of ancient churches
were bombed. The teaching of the Syriac language was prohibited
and Assyrians were forced to give their children Arabic names in an
effort to undermine their Christian identity. Those who wished to
hold government jobs had to declare Arab ethnicity.

In 1987, the Iraqi census listed 1.4 million Christians. Today, only
about 600,000 to 800,000 remain in the country, most on the Nineveh
plain. As many as 60,000, and perhaps even more, have fled since
the beginning of the insurgency that followed the United States-led
invasion in 2003. Their exodus accelerated in August 2004, after the
start of the terrorist bombing campaign against Christian churches by
Islamists who accuse them of collaboration with the allies by virtue
of their faith.

A recent UN report states that religious minorities in Iraq "have
become the regular victims of discrimination, harassment, and,
at times, persecution, with incidents ranging from intimidation to
murder." It also observed that "members of the Christian minority
appear to be particularly targeted."

Indeed, there are widespread reports of Christians fleeing the country
as a result of threats being made to their women for not adhering
to strict Islamic dress codes. Christian women are said to have had
acid thrown in their faces. Some have been killed for wearing jeans
or not wearing the veil.

This type of violence is particularly acute in the area around Mosul.

High-ranking clergy there claim that priests in Iraq can no longer
wear their clerical robes in public for fear of being attacked by
Islamists. Last January, coordinated car-bomb attacks were carried
out on six churches in Baghdad and Kirkuk; on another occasion, six
churches were simultaneously bombed in Baghdad and Mosul. Over the
past two years, 27 Assyrian churches have reportedly been attacked
for the sole reason that they were Christian places of worship.

The attacks go beyond targeting physical manifestations of the faith.

Christian-owned small businesses, particularly those selling alcohol,
have been attacked, and many shopkeepers murdered. The director of the
Iraqi Museum, Donny George, a respected Assyrian, says that he was
forced to flee Iraq to Syria in fear of his life, and that Islamic
fundamentalists obstructed all of his work that was not focused on
Islamic artefacts.

Assyrian leaders also complain of deliberate discrimination in the
January 2005 elections. In some cases, they claim, ballot boxes
did not arrive in Assyrian towns and villages, voting officials
failed to show up, or ballot boxes were stolen. They also cite
the intimidating presence of Kurdish militia and secret police near
polling stations. Recently, however, there are signs the Iraqi Kurdish
authorities are being more protective of their Christian communities.

Sadly, the plight of Iraq’s Christians is not an isolated one in the
Middle East. In Iran, the population as a whole has nearly doubled
since the 1979 revolution; but, under a hostile regime, the number
of Christians in the country has fallen from roughly 300,000 to
100,000. In 1948, Christians accounted for roughly 20 percent of
the population of what was then Palestine; since then, their numbers
have roughly halved. In Egypt, emigration among Coptic Christians is
disproportionately high; many convert to Islam under pressure, and
over the past few years violence perpetrated against the Christian
community has taken many lives.

The persecution of these ancient and unique Christian communities,
in Iraq and in the Middle East as a whole, is deeply disturbing. Last
April, the European Parliament voted virtually unanimously for the
Assyrians to be allowed to establish (on the basis of section 5 of
the Iraqi Constitution) a federal region where they can be free from
outside interference to practice their own way of life. It is high
time now that the West paid more attention, and took forceful action
to secure the future of Iraq’s embattled Christians.

Charles Tannock is vice-president of the Human Rights Subcommittee
of the European Parliament and the Conservative Party’s
foreign affairs spokesman in the United Kingdom. THE DAILY STAR
publishes this commentary in collaboration with Project Syndicate
().

http://www .dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&cat eg_id=5&article_id=75907

ARMY UNDER CIVILIAN CONTROL IN EUROPE
By Suleyman Kurt, Zaman, Ankara

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 4 2006

In response to General Yasar Buyukanit’s remarks on the EU, European
Commissioner for Enlargement, Olli Rehn, said "The army is under
civilian control in European democracies."

Finland’s Olli Rehn had meetings in the Turkish capital of Ankara on
the first anniversary of full membership negotiations between Turkey
and the EU.

In a symposium titled "European Social Model and Syndical Rights in the
Process of Negotiation with EU," Rehn fielded questions from the press.

In response to a reporter’s question "Are there reactionary movements
in Turkey?", a reference to the Turkish Chief of General Staff ‘s
remarks, Rehn said "There is a misunderstanding here."

Stating they are open to dialogue with Turkish Armed Forces (TSK),
Rehn noted he does not question their professionalism.

"We have a deep respect for the TSK. They support international
peace-keeping forces. We consider Turkey’s general outlook with
respect to democratically elected governments. Turkey may take pride
in the reforms it has realized. It must be particularly proud of the
reforms in army-civilian relationships.. In European democracies,
the Army is under civilian control," Rehn said.

"I am here because I do not want this first anniversary of negotiations
to be the last," Rehn said and he asked Ankara "to restart the reform
process and fulfill liabilities in the supplementary protocol" in
order to prevent a possible "train crash."

Rehn asked that article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code be amended and
said: "This article is in no compliance with EU standards. Turkey is
a democratic and powerful country. Does it need such an article?"

Rehn said this change is "related with Turkey’s negotiations with
the EU."

Stating the EU needs Turkey, the European Commissioner said "A train
crash can be prevented with necessary political will."

In the framework of his contacts in Ankara concerning the amendment
of the article 301, Rehn also paid visits to Minister of Justice
Cemil Cicek and main opposition leader Deniz Baykal, but failed to
obtain support.

Criticizing Rehn’s approach of the article 301, Cicek replied
to a relevant question from the reporters as follows: "Instead of
asking about this, ask about the draft in France." [Referring to the
draft bill envisioning punishment for those rejecting the Armenian
"genocide."]

The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader stated
similar articles exist in EU member countries as well, and this
article may become redundant in Turkey in a few years’ time.

Recognizing genocide is no condition for membership

Rehn repeated that recognition of the Armenian genocide allegations
is not a condition for EU membership.

Stating Turkey should handle "such issues" both within itself and with
its neighbor Armenia, Rehn gave support to Turkey’s proposal to set up
"a joint commission of historians."

Rehn and Gul to Discuss Finnish Formula for Cyprus

The commissioner for enlargement, in talks he will hold with Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul,
will discuss proposals put forward by EU Term President Finland in
order to prevent a possible "train crash."

Rehn spoke "hopefully" before the talk, but rumors in Ankara that
"the proposal contains imbalances" indicate the difficulty in finding
a solution.

Previously, Term President Finland offered a package of proposals
to Turkey, Greece and Cyprus in order to overcome the problems over
"Cyprus."

Rehn will repeat the proposal in today’s meetings and ask for
a solution.

Ankara will remind Rehn of the EU’s promises on removing sanctions
against Northern Cyprus.

The parties did not give a "negative reply" to Finland’s proposals
in the first stage.

Communicating the proposal verbally, not in writing, is interpreted as
"taking the pulse."

Rehn, in his statement yesterday, said: "I do not want to be too
optimistic, but this is an encouraging situation. If parties wanted
to reject the formula, they would make it leak to the press."

However, no such atmosphere is perceived in Ankara.

Though certain elements in the package of proposals also exist in
Turkey’s "Cyprus Action Plan," sources think there is imbalance in
other elements.

IRAN-ARMENIA GAS PIPELINE ON STREAM EARLY 2007

Tehran Times
Oct 4 2006

TEHRAN – The project of Iran’s gas conveyance pipeline to Armenia will
come on stream early 2007, Reza Kasaiizadeh, the managing director
of the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) said here on Wednesday.

"First, Iran will export 3 million cu. m. of gas per day to
Armenia. The figure will gradually reach 10 million cu. m. of gas per
day, according to the schedule," he told Iranian Students News Agency
(ISNA).

Shifting to Iran-Turkey gas pipeline, he said that Iran’s gas export
to Turkey was resumed on October 2, after parts of the pipeline which
were damaged by last Thursday’s explosion were repaired.

"The explosion was the first of a kind occurred at Iran’s border. NIGC
is pursuing plans to increase security in border regions in order to
prevent such events in future," he added.

He also said that Iran presently exports 20 million cu. m. of gas to
Turkey per day.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

OP-ED ON "THE NEW YORK TIMES APPEASEMENT OF TURKEY"
By Gene Rossides

Hellenic News of America
Oct 4 2006

The New York Times Appeasement of Turkey

Washington, DC – The following Op-Ed appeared in the September
23, 2006 issue of The National Herald, page 11, the September 25,
2006 issue of Greek News, page 48, the October 3, 2006 issue of the
Hellenic News of America, page 3 and it will appear in the October 11,
2006 issue of The Hellenic Voice on page 5.

The New York Times editorial of September 10, 2006, reprinted in the
National Herald in its September 16, 2006 issue, is a prime example of
the New York Times appeasement of Turkey for decades to the detriment
of U.S. interests and to the detriment of Greece and Cyprus.

The editorial contains misstatements of fact, misleading statements
and serious omissions of facts and issues.

The editorial commends the U.S. for appointing retired Air Force
General and former NATO Commander Joseph Ralston "to work with
Turkish authorities.

General Ralston will be responsible for coordinating American
antiterrorist efforts with Iraq and Turkey, both of which have sizable
Kurdish minorities and minorities within those minorities who have
resorted to terror."

The New York Times editorial fails to state that the Turkish
government and military have from 1984 through 1998 resorted to
massive state terror against its 15 million Kurdish minority which
has been characterized as genocide by many observers including the
late respected Senator Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island. During that
time the Turkish military killed 35,000 Kurds, 30,000 of whom were
innocent civilians and 5,000 were PKK rebels.

During that time the Turkish military burned and destroyed 3,000
Kurdish villages creating three million Kurdish refugees in their
own country.

During that time the Turkish paramilitary under the direction of the
Turkish military assassinated 17,500 Kurds as stated by Eric Rouleau,
former French Ambassador to Turkey in his article "Turkey?s Dream
of Democracy" in Foreign Affairs, November/December 2000, pp. 100 to
114 at 112.

Instead the New York Times editorial refers to the Turkish Foreign
Ministry?s hailing "the appointment as a ?new opportunity? for
cooperation between the United States and Turkey"…and says the
U.S. "would be wise to create many more and varied opportunities to
engage with Turkey, a longtime ally, and a uniquely important one."

I strongly disagree that Turkey is "a longtime ally and a uniquely
important one." Let?s look at the record for the 20th century and
the opening years of the 21st century.

The record clearly shows that in the 20th century Turkey fought against
the U.S. in World War I; that in World War II Turkey broke its treaty
with Britain and France to enter the war; stated its neutrality;
profited from both sides; and actually aided Nazi Germany by providing
Hitler with chromium, a vital resource to Nazi Germany?s armaments
industry and war effort. (See F. Weber, The Evasive Neutral 44 (1979).

Hitler?s armaments chief, Albert Speer, provided Hitler a memorandum in
November 1943 on "Alloys in Armaments Productions and the Importance
of Chromium Imports from the Balkans and Turkey," which stated that
the loss of chromium supplies from Turkey would end the war in about 10
months. A. Speer, Inside the Third Reich 316-17, 405, 550 n. 10 (1970).

The allies finally halted chromium exports to Nazi Germany. However
the net effect of Turkey supplying Hitler with chromium was that
Turkey prolonged WW II in Europe by seven months.

Let?s look at the record since 1947 when the U.S. started ait to
Turkey at the beginning of the Cold War. How many readers are aware
that since that date, and while being a NATO member since 1952,
there are several instances where Turkey actively aided the Soviet
military to the detriment of the U.S. and NATO! The facts are well
known yet the New York Times editorial board simply ignores them and
calls Turkey "a staunch NATO member since 1952."

As long ago as 1974, Edward Luttwak, the noted strategic analyst,
discussed Turkey?s cooperation with the Soviet military during the
Cold War. He wrote the following:

"No longer presenting a direct threat to the integrity of Turkish
national territory, and no longer demanding formal revision of
the Straits navigation regime, the Soviet Union has nevertheless
successfully exercised armed suasion over Turkey, even while
maintaining a fairly benevolent stance, which includes significant aid
flows. Faced with a sharp relative increase in Russian strategic and
naval power, and eager to normalize relations with their formidable
neighbor, the Turks have chosen to conciliate the Russians, and have
been able to do so at little or no direct cost to themselves. It
is only in respect to strategic transit that Turkey is of primary
importance to the Soviet Union, and this is the area where the
concessions have been made.

Examples of such deflection, where the Russians are conciliated at
the expense of western rather than specifically Turkish interests,
include the overland traffic agreement (unimpeded Russian transit
to Iraq and Syria by road), the generous Turkish interpretation
of the Montreux Convention, which regulates ship movements in the
Straits, and above all, the overflight permissions accorded to Russian
civilian and military aircraft across Turkish air space. The alliance
relationship in NATO and with the United States no doubt retains
a measure of validity in Turkish eyes, but it is apparent that
its supportive effect is not enough to counteract Russian suasion,
especially since the coercion is latent and packaged in a benevolent,
diplomatic stance." (Luttwak, The Political Uses of Sea Power, Johns
Hopkins Press, 1974, pp. 60-61.)

Examples of Turkey?s disloyalty and unreliability over the past
decades as a NATO ally for U.S. strategic purposes include:

1. During the 1973 Mid-East War, predating the Turkish invasion
of Cyprus by one year, Turkey refused the United States military
overflight rights to resupply Israel and granted the U.S.S.R. overland
military convoy rights to resupply Syria and Iraq, and military
overflight permission to resupply Egypt. (See Karaosmanoglu, "Turkey?s
Security and the Middle East," 52 Foreign Affairs 157, 163, Fall 1983.)

2. In the 1977-78 conflict in Ethiopia, Turkey granted the Soviets
military overflight rights to support the pro-Soviet minority of
Ethiopian communist insurgents, led by Colonel Mengistu, who eventually
prevailed and established a Marxist dictatorship directly dependent
upon the Soviet Union.

(C. Meyer, Facing Reality- From World Federalism to the CIA 276-80,
1980.)

3. Over NATO objections, Turkey allowed three Soviet aircraft carriers,
the Kiev on July 18, 1976, the Minsk on February 25, 1979 and the
Novorosiisk on May 16, 1983, passage rights through the Bosphorous
and Dardanelles Straits into the Mediterranean in violation of the
Montreux Convention of 1936. The Soviet ships posed a formidable
threat to the U.S. Sixth Fleet.

4. In 1979 Turkey refused to allow the U.S. to send 69 U.S. marines
and six helicopters to American military facilities at Incirlik
in Turkey for possible use in evacuating Americans from Iran and
protecting the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

5. Again in 1979 Turkey refused the U.S. request to allow U-2
intelligence flights (for Salt II verification) over Turkish airspace
"unless Moscow agreed." (N.Y. Times, May 15, 1979, at A1, col. 3.) This
position was voiced over a period of months by Turkish officials, the
opposition party and the military Chief of Staff, General Kenan Evren,
(See, Washington Post and New York Times, April-September 1979).

6. In January of 1981, President Carter tried to obtain a commitment
from Turkey for the use of Turkish territory for operations in cases
of conflict in the Middle East. The January 20, 1981, New York Times
reported that Turkey was not in favor of "the United States using
Turkish bases for conflicts not affecting Turkey." In the spring,
1983, issue of Foreign Policy magazine, Harry Shaw pointed out that
Turkey is unlikely to become involved in, or allow U.S. forces to
use Turkish territory in a Middle East war that does not threaten
her territory directly.

7. As an example of the above, in 1980, Turkey refused to permit the
U.S. to use the NATO base at Diyarbakir in eastern Turkey as a transit
point for the purpose of conducting a rescue mission into Tehran,
Iran, to free the American hostages held in that city. The distance
from Diyarbakir to Tehran is 450 miles as opposed to the actual route
taken, which was over 900 miles.

8. In May, 1989, Turkey rejected an American request to inspect an
advanced MIG-29 Soviet fighter plane, flown by a Soviet defector to
Turkey. (New York Times, May 28, 1989, at A12, col.1.)

9. The Turkish government refused repeated American requests for the
installation of antennas in Turkey concerning eleven transmitters
whose broadcasts would have been directed primarily at the Soviet
Union and its eastern European satellites. (Newsweek, July 22, 1983)

10. Turkey further damaged NATO by vetoing NATO?s effort to put
military bases on various Greek islands in the Aegean for defensive
purposes against the Soviet navy.

Most readers are aware of the latest failure of Turkey as an "ally"
to assist the U.S., namely, the Turkish Parliament?s refusal on March
1, 2003 to allow U.S. troops to use bases in Turkey to open a northern
front against Saddam Hussein?s dictatorship when it counted most.

The reason for the refusal was Turkey?s efforts to get more
money. Prime Minister Erdogan stated that he wanted $6 billion more
for Turkey?s cooperation over the $26 billion irresponsibly offered by
the then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz! A U.S. negotiator
called it "extortion in the name of alliance."

The Times states erroneously that Turkey is a "secular democracy
situated between Europe and the Middle East." Freedom House points out
that Turkey is a "partial democracy" because, among other things, the
military is not under civilian control and there is a lack of freedom
of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion. Further
Turkey is 95% in the Middle East and 5% is Europe.

The public opinion surveys in Turkey referred to by the Times
editorial can and should be cited to demonstrate that Turkey, a 99%
Muslim nation, cannot be relied upon by the U.S., NATO and the West.

The Times editorial?s serious omissions of issues and facts are
three-fold: Cyprus, the Aegean and Armenia. How could an editorial on
Turkey not include a discussion of Turkey?s invasion of Cyprus in 1974
and its occupation of 37.3% of northern Cyprus since 1974 with 35,000
illegal occupation troops, and 120,000 illegal colonists/settlers
in violation of the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Turkish barbed
wire fence across the face of Cyprus?

How could it not refer to the report of the UN Commission of Human
Rights condemning Turkey for the killings and rapes of innocent
civilians and looting by its army in 1974 and thereafter?

How could it not refer to the Turkish Air Forces illegal flights in the
Aegean in violation of the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) rules?

How could such an editorial not discuss the illegal economic blockade
of Armenia which prevents U.S. humanitarian supplies to Armenia?

Frankly, the editorial should have asked:

What is the U.S. State Department doing to advance full human and
political rights for Turkey?s Kurds?

When is the State Department going to apply the Bush doctrine of
democracy to Turkey?

What is the State Department doing to remove the Turkish occupation
troops and settlers from Cyprus and getting rid of the Turkish barbed
wire fence?

What is the State Department doing to halt the illegal Turkish Air
Force flights in the Aegean in violation of ICAO rules? General Ralston
should have been appointed to halt Turkey?s illegal Air Force flights
in the Aegean.

What is the State Department doing to lift Turkey?s economic blockade
of Armenia?

I urge my readers to write and call the New York Times to protest
its appeasement of Turkey. Your letters and calls can definitely help.

ewsid=5641&lang=US

AZERBAIJAN REJECTS EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE A FINAL PEACE ON NAGORNO KARABAKH
Vardan Barseghian

Diplomatic Traffic, DC
Oct 4 2006

Mr. Cromwell,

Thank God, you did not need to ask for Azerbaijan’s permission to
meet with me and to publish an article based on my interview. Anybody
can guess the outcome if you were to do so. Fortunately for Karabakh,
we also don’t need to ask for Azerbaijan’s permission to do anything
anymore: Karabakh has been free for 15 years!

Historic facts are important to understanding a region with a very
complex history, such as Nagorno Karabakh’s. Many people would also
agree that debates can help air differences and, hopefully, also
find points of agreement. Thus, I think debates on Nagorno Karabakh,
including the one on DiplomaticTraffic.com, could be useful. However,
Azerbaijan and its representatives (both official and non-official),
while continuing to have plenty of opportunities to speak directly,
debate and negotiate with representatives of Nagorno Karabakh,
regrettably, prefer doing so through third parties, international
organizations and media, branding Karabakh in a very negative light
along the way, which resembles propaganda rather than a genuine effort
to advance a peaceful resolution of this conflict.

Time and again, Nagorno Karabakh has offered to implement
confidence-building measures to establish an atmosphere of trust,
conductive to reaching a final peace. We also remain open for a
constructive dialogue with Azerbaijan on every level, official and
non-official. Azerbaijan continues to reject any such efforts and
contacts. Since the cease-fire agreement of 1994, the ball [to advance
lasting peace] has been in Azerbaijan’s court. I hope Azerbaijan
would finally choose to use it.

In Karabakh, we like shortcuts, and it is time for Azerbaijan to take a
‘shortcut’ and speak with Nagorno Karabakh directly, if Azerbaijan is
sincere about its desire to achieve a negotiated peace. Unfortunately,
we don’t have a single reason to believe that the latter assumption
about Azerbaijan is valid…

In Karabakh, we are also very serious about our independence and our
determination to defend it.

Vardan Barseghian Representative of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
Office of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in the United States

p?ID=588

SOME TURKS CHANGE RELIGION TO SEEK TICKETS WEST
By Nicolas Cheviron

Assyrian International News Agency AINA
Oct 4 2006

ISTANBUL — Turkey’s few Muslim converts to Christianity, of which
the hijacker Tuesday of a Turkish airliner claimed to be one, are
a motley, marginal group that includes people on personal spiritual
quests, as well as those in search of more material benefits.

Hakan Ekinci, 28, who hijacked a Turkish Airlines Tirana-Istanbul
flight to Italy on Tuesday, presented himself in an internet blog
adressed to Pope Benedict XVI as one such convert who did not want
to serve in "a Muslim army."

Whether he actually belongs to any of Turkey’s Christian churches,
however, has come under doubt with the appearance of several articles
in the Turkish press Wednesday saying he has a criminal record for
fraud, in addition to two spells in the stockade for desertion.

Most of Turkey’s "new Christians" — who only number about 1,000 in
a population of 73 million that is more than 99 percent Muslim —
belong to a score of evangelical parishes scattered across Turkey.

"We have about a thousand followers in our churches, mostly Turks,
but also a few foreigners and, when there is only one church in town,
some Armenian Orthodox and Catholics as well," explained Sait Cakir
of the Ankara Evangelical Community.

The evangelical churches, which are not recognised by the strictly
secular laws of Turkey, are mainly in the three biggest cities —
Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir.

"The fact that we are open to everyone means that we get some strange
followers," said Ihsan Ozbek, the evangelical pastor for Ankara. "Some
come looking for women, others for money, yet others for visas to
the west."

Bulent, who works for an international organisation in the Turkish
capital and will not reveal his last name, said his conversion was
the result of an arduous quest for his roots.

"My father always said we were descendents of Turkmens from Central
Asia," he said. "But one day, I learned that we were in fact a family
of Jews who had converted to Islam."

After mulling this over for a while, he finally opted in 1993 to join
the Syriac church, in memory of the many tales his grandmother used
to tell him of the Christians of southeast Anatolia, where her family
originated from.

Ferda, who also did not want to give her family name, said she too
felt uncomfortable with her identity as a Turk.

She was raised in a community of Muslim Greeks who were deported to
Turkey during the population exchanges of 1923.

"But when I went to high school," she said, "I suddenly realised what a
stranger I was to Turkish culture" — so she converted to Catholicism.

But conversions to the Roman church, as to the other mainstream
churches in Turkey — mostly Armenian and Greek orthodox — remain
the exception.

IS TURKEY CHANGING SIDES?
Perspective on the news by Jack Kelley

Prophezine , TX
Oct 4 2006

In the Qandil (Kandil) Mountains, where Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria
all meet lies the ancestral homeland of the Kurds, known in history
as the Medes, who were partners with Persia in defeating Babylon.

The Kurds call this area Kurdistan, but the land they refer to
technically belongs to the four neighbors mentioned above, none
of whom want to give it up. Turkey is perhaps the most determined,
having suffered numerous terrorist attacks at the hand of the PUK,
a group of militant Kurdish separatists. One of the reasons that
Turkey refused to help in the current war in Iraq is that the USA
refused to deny the Kurds a voice in governing post-war Iraq.

Turkey has been legitimately afraid that in return for Kurdish
assistance in deposing Saddam Hussein (it was the Kurds who
located Saddam and tipped off US troops) the US would permit at
least unofficial attempts to establish a Kurdish homeland on land
that Turkey claims. Turkey has maintained up to 20,000 troops on its
border with Iraq to prevent such a move.

And in fact the US has been vacillating on the Kurdish issue, even
publishing a map of the region showing the presence of a Kurdish
entity. US officials later claimed it didn’t accurately reflect US
policy. Turkey is skeptical.

Iran sees this situation as an opportunity to further strengthen its
regional position and has teamed up with Turkey to assist in removing a
force of 5000 PUK soldiers from the area where Iran abuts Iraq in the
Qandil Mountains. According to several news and intelligence sources
they already have positioned troops some 7-8 km inside Iraq and have
begun shelling the mountain hideouts. The situation for Turkey offers
some big incentives.

Not only do they get help in spanking the PUK, but have made it known
that they have their eye on Kirkuk, an Iraqi city in the area that
produces 40% of Iraq’s oil output, and that Turkey had made claim
to before.

For its part Iran also sees a chance grab a chunk of Northern Iraq
for itself. In addition Iran wants to destroy forward intelligence
positions the Israelis may have secretly placed among the Kurds to
help them receive the earliest possible warning of an Iranian attack
on Israel. Knocking out these posts would give the Iranians two
significant victories against the Israelis within the span of just
a few months, the war in Lebanon being the other. The loss of this
intelligence would no doubt reduce the possibility for a successful
US-Israeli attack against Iran, too. Russian and Iranian intelligence
experts are both predicting such an attack before the end of 2006.

Many observers believe it’s already too late to stop the Turkey-Iran
initiative. The question is whether it will blossom into yet another
Mid-East war pitting the US, Iraq, and Israel against Iran, Turkey,
and possibly Syria.

Students of prophecy should follow these developments closely. Turkey
is felt by most to be a modern component along with Armenia of the
Beth Togarmah mentioned in Ezekiel 38:6. We’ve long said that as long
as Turkey is aligned with the west Ezekiel 38 can’t happen. Bringing
Turkey into the Moslem alliance against Israel would remove one more
roadblock to its fulfillment. There aren’t many left.

CAUCASUS REELS FROM MOSCOW-TBILISI FIGHT
By Mikhail Vignansky in Tbilisi

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
Oct 4 2006

As Russian-Georgian relations hit a new low, the whole region is
nervous.

"I have a ticket to fly to Moscow tomorrow. Will I be able to
fly?" enquires a caller to Tbilisi airport’s information bureau. "There
are no flights to Russia right now. Could you call later? Things may
change," comes the response.

Over the past few days, operators at the bureau have had to deal with
a flood of such calls.

With Russia and Georgia experiencing probably their stormiest row since
the collapse of the Soviet Union 15 years ago, Moscow has effectively
declared a blockade of Georgia, cancelling all transport and postal
links with its southern neighbour. The shutdown is also hurting
ordinary people and businesses in Armenia and the North Caucasus.

The tough measures followed the very public arrest on September 27 of
four Russian military officers whom the Georgian authorities accused
of spying – and continued to do so even after their release.

Initially, Georgia refused to return the arrested, later changing
its mind.

But even the nature of the handover of the four was insulting for
Moscow.

Lieutenant colonels Dmitry Kazantsev, Alexander Savva, Alexander
Baranov and Captain Alexander Zavgorodny listened to the accusations
of espionage against them outside the Georgian general prosecutor’s
office on October 2 and were then told they were being deported.

Georgian foreign minister Gela Bezhuashvili and current OSCE chairman
in office and Belgian foreign minister Karel De Gucht, who had come
to Georgia specially to resolve the crisis, were present for this
rather theatrical ceremony.

Russian defence minister Sergei Ivanov who met the officers at the
airport in Moscow stressed that the men who were "spies" in Georgia
were heroes in Russia.

President Mikheil Saakashvili said "there are no threats that can
intimidate Georgia", but also pointed out that he wanted a good
relationship with Russia. "We do not need Russian military officers
but we need Russian tourists. We do not need Russian spies but we
need Russian business. Russia and Georgia are historic partners. Our
countries are linked by cultures and national traditions and have
always lived side by side," said the Georgian leader.

In a conciliatory gesture, Georgia has also agreed to allow Russian
peacekeepers in Abkhazia to monitor the Kodori Gorge region alongside
UN peacekeepers, something it had previously opposed.

Karel De Gucht urged Moscow to cancel its blockade and "defuse the
situation".

Russian president Vladimir Putin had earlier accused "foreign
sponsors" of being behind an attempt to "pinch" his country "as hard
as possible." And he reportedly told US president George Bush that
"any actions by third countries that could be interpreted by Georgia
as encouragement of its destructive policy are unacceptable".

Political analyst Ramaz Sakvarelidze said it was significant that
the men had been handed over to an intermediary, not directly to
Russia. "So even if this was a concession on Georgia’s part, it was
made to the international community. The international community wanted
to regulate the crisis and we decided not to cause them problems. It
means that Georgia needs a mediator to speak with Russia," he said.

Georgian politicians dismiss the charge that they are being encouraged
in Washington. Georgian parliamentary speaker Nino Burjanadze
told IWPR, "Russian political circles seem to be running short of
imagination…. Even if we presume that all this is being dictated
from overseas, which is absolutely untrue, it nevertheless becomes
clear how weak Russia’s position is. This means that Russia cannot
dictate to Georgia what is advantageous for it but the United States,
which is thousands of kilometres away can do this."

Flights between the two countries were halted at midnight Moscow time
on October 3 and Russia has also severed maritime, road, and railway
links as well as postal communications with Georgia.

Russian parliamentary speaker Boris Gryzlov said, "The sanctions that
Russia is imposing are directed against the Saakashvili authorities,
not against the Georgian people."

However, it is ordinary Georgian citizens who are suffering the
most. "I couldn’t go to my brother’s funeral to Moscow. My heart is
breaking with grief," said Shota who had not left Tbilisi airport
for three days, waiting for a flight to Moscow.

Citizens of landlocked Armenia are also desperately worried about
the blockade on Georgia, as Georgia provides them with their main
land route to Russia. Businessmen are complaining of halted cargos
and potentially huge losses.

"In the long-term this could do serious damage to the economy of
Armenia as our route not only to Georgia itself but to the countries
of the CIS and Europe lies via Georgia," said Tatul Manaserian,
economist and member of the Armenian parliament.

Vahan Hovhannesian, deputy speaker of parliament, said, "I think it is
not the first time that Russia is defining its relations with Georgia
and not taking into account the interests of Armenia. Maybe they expect
understanding from us, but I for one don’t have any. Because Russia,
which is our strategic ally, whether it wants it or not, is taking
part in the blockade of Armenia."

Many in the Russian North Caucasus are also unhappy. The main border
crossing between North Ossetia and Georgia at Verkhny Lars has been
closed since July for "repair work". A demonstration was held in
Vladikavkaz in September calling for the crossing to be reopened. "Not
just Georgians living in North Ossetia but also Ossetians took part
in it," said Alexander Rekhviashvili of Vladikavkaz University. "Both
are losing a great deal because the border is closed."

In Georgia, people are afraid above all of a cold winter without the
electricity and gas that Georgia mainly receives from Russia.

Although the Georgia’s energy ministry frequently reassures people
with statements about alternative energy resources in the event of
an energy blockade by Russia, on the very first day of the downturn
in Russian-Georgian relations, pensioner Nelly Kakabadze found time
to go to the marketplace and buy a kerosene heater.

"I should also stock up on kerosene and flour. Warmth and bread are
the only things that I need," she told IWPR.

The Russian Duma is also considering banning money transfers to –
and other banking operations – with Georgia. This information was
especially painful news in Georgia. According to information here,
during the first eight months of this year, 324 million dollars in
transfers was sent to Georgia from foreign countries. By far the
largest amount – 219 million dollars – was transferred from Russia
and 61 million dollars was sent from Georgia to Russia during the same
period. According to Russian data broadcast by the Russian television
channel NTV, the remittances to Georgia from Russia are worth 330
million dollars, which is equal to US assistance for Georgia over
the last three years.

Georgians living in Russia say that restrictions are already being
imposed on them. "Yesterday (October 3), there were long lines
of Georgians in almost all banks in Moscow, as we knew that money
transfers would soon be stopped," Nani Baramidze who lives in Moscow,
told IWPR. "However, by four o’clock yesterday, we were told that it is
already impossible to transfer money to Georgia. I have parents there
and I send them a small sum every month. I do not know what to do."

There are also expectations in Tbilisi of a rise in the price of
energy resources and food products, including bread.

Economic expert Niko Orvelashvili said it was quite possible
Russia would move to raise the price of the energy it supplies to
Georgia or suspend supplies altogether. "If Russia uses the lever
of energy resources for political purposes, it will show the entire
international community that it cannot be a reliable partner in this
field," he said. "Anyway, our authorities should already be thinking
about creating stocks of oil products and people about how to survive
one more ‘dark’ winter."

The crisis has also changed the domestic political climate in
Georgia. Ahead of the October 5 local elections, almost all political
movements, including the opposition, stated that, despite internal
divisions, they had no differences from the government on policy
towards Russia. Opposition Conservative Party leader Koba Davitashvili
called for a "human chain" to be made round the Russian embassy on
October 4 as a demonstration of Georgian unity.

"Russian politicians should not harbour any illusions that any pressure
not only on the government but also Georgia and the Georgian nation
will achieve results, and forces that will agree to succumb to Russia’s
will can emerge in this country," he said.

Mikhail Vignansky is a correspondent for Spanish news agency EFE and
the Moscow newspaper Vremya Novostei. Armenian journalists Tatul
Hakobian and Diana Markosian and IWPR North Caucasus coordinator
Valery Dzutsev also contributed to this report.

PROSECUTOR’S BROTHER MOVES TO BECOME YEREVAN DISTRICT CHIEF
By Astghik Bedevian

Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 4 2006

Prosecutor-General Aghvan Hovsepian has moved to retain his de facto
control of Yerevan’s western Ajapnyak district by having his younger
brother stand in the local mayoral election slated for October 29.

Ruben Hovsepian’s participation and likely victory in the poll should
also avert a new clash between two mutually antagonistic clans that
hold sway in the area.

Artsrun Khachatrian, Ajapnyak’s incumbent mayor who has governed
the district for the last six years, represents one of those
clans. Khachatrian is a prominent member of a broader faction led by
the influential prosecutor. It mainly consists of prominent natives
of the Aparan district in central Armenia.

The rival camp is headed by senior lawmaker Galust Sahakian and
his brother-in-law Ashot Aghababian. Both men are senior members of
the governing Republican Party (HHK) and longtime associates of its
official leader, Prime Minister Andranik Markarian. Sahakian’s son
Arman was narrowly defeated by Khachatrian in 2003 and planned to
again try to unseat the latter in the upcoming election. The previous
local polls were marred by violence and accusations of vote rigging,
and many observers expected more trouble this time around.

However, Arman Sahakian was effectively forced to pull out of the
race after the HHK’s governing board refused to back his candidacy in
August at the apparent behest of Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian. The
unexpected move fueled speculation about a deal cut by Sarkisian
and Hovsepian.

Samvel Yeranian, chairman of the Ajapnyak election commission, told
RFE/RL that Khachatrian is not among four men who have applied for
registration as election candidates before Wednesday’s deadline. It
turned out that all of them, including Hovsepian’s brother, are
members of the prosecutor’s Nig-Aparan organization. One of the
hopefuls, Gagik Sargsian, is at the same time affiliated with the
Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), the HHK’s junior
coalition partner that has an uneasy rapport with Hovsepian.

In a newspaper interview published on Wednesday, Khachatrian
claimed that he was not pressurized into quitting the race. "I
made that decision [not to contest the vote] for the sake of the
people of Ajapnyak because I don’t want the community to turn into
a battlefield," he told the "Haykakan Zhamanak" daily.

The Sahakians, for their part, have said they draw comfort from the
fact that Khachatrian will no longer run the area increasingly seen
as Hovsepian’s stronghold. Ajapnyak is home to several businesses
that are reportedly owned by the prosecutor.

Hovsepian underscored his far-reaching political ambitions last month
as he presided over the founding conference of a coalition of so-called
"compatriots’ unions" that unite prominent natives of various regions
of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Nig-Aparan is expected to play a
leading role in the grouping.

Nig-Aparan is also the driving force behind a recently formed
political party which intends to make a strong showing in next year’s
parliamentary elections. Leaders of the party, called Association for
Armenia, have not ruled out the possibility of forming an electoral
alliance with the HHK.

EX-SPEAKER ALLEGES ARMENIAN CURRENCY MANIPULATION
By Emil Danielyan

Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 4 2006

Former parliament speaker Artur Baghdasarian launched a blistering
attack on the Armenian authorities late Tuesday, adding his voice
to opposition allegations that they are artificially boosting the
national currency for personal gain.

Risking more accusations of populism, he also announced that his
Orinats Yerkir party, which was forced out of the governing coalition
last spring, will push for a major reduction of key utility fees.

"Elementary calculations show that we are dealing with a direct
embezzlement of $200 million," Baghdasarian charged in a speech in
parliament, referring to a further surge in the value of the Armenian
dram registered in the last six months. He claimed, without naming
names, that the authorities have engineered the dram’s appreciation
to pocket a large part of hundreds of millions of dollars in cash
remittances sent home by Armenians working abroad.

The Armenian Central Bank and the government strongly deny such
accusations, which have been voiced by opposition leaders and other
government critics ever since the dram began its dramatic rise in
December 2003. The Armenian currency has since gained more than 40
percent in value against the dollar, hurting local manufacturers and
scores of people dependent on the dollar remittances.

The authorities in Yerevan, backed by the International Monetary Fund
and the World Bank, insist that the exchange rate fluctuation is the
result of Armenia’s double-digit economic growth and a substantial
increase in the volume of wire transfers from Russia, Europe and
the United States. The transfers are expected to total at least $1.5
billion dollars this year.

Making his first appearance in the National Assembly since his
resignation in May, Baghdasarian claimed that if the dram’s exchange
was indeed market-based, the basic utility and consumer prices in
Armenia would have fallen by now. "The prices of gas, electricity and
water remain the same, even though the dollar is falling," he said,
arguing that Armenia imports the bulk of its energy resources.

Baghdasarian added that Orinats Yerkir will seek a Constitutional
Court ruling allowing Armenian citizens to challenge utility prices
set by state regulators in court. Under an existing Armenian law,
decisions taken by the Public Service Regulatory Commission can not
be overturned by local courts.

Baghdasarian and other opposition leaders say the law is
unconstitutional.

Baghdasarian’s initiative seems heralds the start of Orinats Yerkir’s
preparations for next year’s parliamentary elections. The ambitious
ex-speaker has long been accused of resorting to populism to win
votes and his latest comments will likely prompt more such accusations.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress