Month: November 2006

ARMENIAN COMMUNISTS CELEBRATE 89TH ANNIVERSARY OF OCTOBER REVOLUTION
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
Armenian communists held a number of events devoted to the 89th
anniversary of the Great October Revolution on November 7.
By tradition, about 200 activists and supporters of the Communist
Party of Armenia (CPA) visited the monuments for one of the first
heads of the Armenian Soviet Government Alexander Myasnikyan and Head
of Baku Commune Stepan Shahumyan.
First Secretary of CPA Central Committee Ruben Tovmasyan said at a
mini-rally near the monument for A. Myasnikyan: “One can see oligarchs
and their hangers-on instead of ordinary working people in Armenia
and understand how urgent are the ideals of the Great October that
secured the right to education, rest and labor to the workers and
peasants, and to the working intellectuals”.
After the events in Yerevan, CPA leadership left for the village
of Lernamerdz, Armavir region, to visit the bust of Vladimir Ilyich
Lenin. The local pioneer organization presented a small literature
party in the village center.

ROBERT KOCHARYAN: IT SEEMS NO AGREEMENT ON RESOLUTION OF KARABAKH CONFLICT WILL BE THIS YEAR
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
“The year 2006 is a year of opportunities, since there were no
elections either in Armenia or Azerbaijan”, Robert Kocharyan, President
of Armenia, said at the meeting with the Armenian community of Astana.
Kazakh Mass Media reports that President Kocharyan pointed out that
Armenian side tried to actively conduct negotiations with Azeri
side on resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but, unfortunately,
no success was achieved.
The President said that Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan
recently held a meeting on finding the ways to resolve the conflict.
The President admits a possibility of meeting with President Alyev in
Minsk in the end of November but it much depends upon the results of
the Foreign Ministers’ meeting. “There is nothing definite about it
yet. The latest meetings with President Alyev weren’t optimistic and
it seems no agreement will be reached this year either”, concluded
President Kocharyan.
From: Baghdasarian

POLAND TO BE A MEDIATOR IN IMPROVING ARMENIA-TURKEY DIALOGUE
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
Poland came out with proposal to propose Armenian interests to
Turkey and visa versa. Armenian side has already responded on the
proposal, Bogdan Borusewicz, the Marshal of the Polish Seym, said at
the press conference in Yerevan today. He said that despite the lack
of diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia the both countries
are of interest to each other. He pointed out that relations between
the two states should be improved by means of the ‘small steps’ policy.
The Marshal said that the closed border is a bigger problem for
Armenia rather than for Turkey. “If the closed border is a question
of principle for Armenia it is only a local one for Turkey”, said.
Mr. Borusewicz. He added that Poland is for Turkey’s membership in EU
even if the process will take 15 years. “I think Turkey’s membership
in EU will benefit for Armenia as well”, the Marshal said.
In his turn, Speaker of the Armenian Parliament Tigran Torossyan agreed
with Borusewicz that Turkey’s entry into the EU is not contrary to
Armenia’s interests as each EU member state should comply with the
European values. Simply it would be strange if Turkey joined the EU
without opening its border with Armenia. Torossyan is not optimistic
in the matter as he has met with Turkish representatives and has
seen that Turkey has a stiff approach to the problem of its relations
with Armenia.
The speakers said that the Armenian-Polish cooperation is quite
developed. Torossyan expressed hope that the visit of Borusewicz will
increase the role of Poland in Armenia, while Borusewicz said that
his visit will help to enhance the image of Armenia in Poland. The
sides noted that the economic cooperation is not active because of
Armenia’s blockade. In 2005 the Armenian-Polish trade turnover was
just $17 mln. In order to attract Polish investments Armenia should
become a more predictable country. Borusewicz noted that Armenia has
big potential for democracy development.

ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER RECEIVED SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE OF GREAT BRITAIN FOR SOUTH CAUCASUS
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan and Special Representative
of Great Britain for the South Caucasus Brian Fall have met in Yerevan.
The press-service of the Armenian Foreign Ministry told ArmInfo
that B.Fall leads a British delegation which includes the British
ambassadors to Armenia and Georgia who participate in the “South
Caucasus. Perceptions and Challenges of the Region” international
conference in Yerevan. Oskanyan and Fall satisfactorily appreciated
the organization and efficiency of the conference, pointing out that
such event is held in the South Caucasus for the first time. During
the meeting, they also discussed regional problems, particularly,
the Russian-Georgian relations and the Karabakh peace process.
The conference started on November 6 and will last till November 9.
The activities will cover the tasks and possibilities of the region
situated on the West-East crossroad, the independence experience
of the region’s countries, the economic tasks of the governments,
entrepreneurs and financial establishments of the region’s countries
directed at economic development and stimulation of investments.
The organizer of the event is the “Wilton Park” international center
which is attached to the Foreign Ministry of Great Britain and has
the status of an independent academic establishment. Since 1946
it has organized over 1000 conferences on politics, economic tasks
and security.

IN HOVHANNES HOVHANNISIAN’S WORDS, COUNTRY’S ECONOMY SUFFERS FROM ARMENIA’S “DECREPIT” DEMOCRACY
Noyan Tapan News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 7, NOYAN TAPAN. Democratic values, in particular,
freedom of expression, became shattered in Armenia, and country’s
economy suffers from this. Hovhannes Hovhannisian, Chairman of
the Liberal Progressive Party of Armenia (LPPA), expressed such an
opinion at the November 7 dispite with Mekhak Mkhitarian, Head of
NA Business deputy group. In his words, if lately the Freedom House
international human rights organization called on the Millennium
Challenge corporation not to provide any funds to Armenia and as
a reason mentioned not ensuring civil freedoms in Armenia, this
means that these freedoms indeed are not at the proper level. In
H.Hovhannisian’s words, the Armenian economy will sustain great
losses unless the expected sum of 235 mln dollars is provided to the
country, which is envisaged for development of Armenia’s border rural
populated areas.
M.Mkhitarian, in his turn, said that the independent Armenia is only
15 years old and this, in his words, is not a sufficient period
for creating really a democratic system. Besides, as M.Mkhitarian
emphasized, in order to have an idea about the democratic indices
in Armenia one should compare them not with the indices of developed
European countries, but with those of CIS member countries.
However, the interlocutors hold the same opinion in the issue that
there is no sound political dialogue in the country. M.Mkhitarian
regretted to say that “the people having civilization of thousand
years has not formed a culture of dispute yet.”

RUSSIA’S GAZPROM WARNS IT WILL CUT OFF GAS TO GEORGIA IF IT DOESN’T AGREE TO HIGHER PRICE
By Henry Meyer, Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press
November 7, 2006 Tuesday 5:28 PM GMT
Russian state gas monopoly Gazprom warned Georgia on Tuesday that it
would cut off gas supplies by Jan. 1 unless Russia’s small southern
neighbor agreed to pay more than double the current price.
The head of OAO Gazprom’s export arm, Alexander Medvedev, told
reporters that unless Tbilisi signed a new contract for 2007 on terms
demanded by the Russian company, Gazprom would turn off the taps and
make only transit deliveries to Armenia through the pipeline that
crosses Georgia.
“If there is no contract, we will be obliged to supply only consumers
in Armenia. I wouldn’t call this a cutoff. The lack of a supply
contract means no supplies,” said Medvedev. He added that Georgia could
negotiate a lower price only if it offered some assets in exchange.
Gazprom last week said it plans to charge Tbilisi $230 per 1,000 cubic
meters of gas, compared with the $110 that it pays now, ratcheting
up economic pressure against the U.S.-allied Caucasus Mountain state.
Georgian leaders said that the sharp price rise was obviously political
because other ex-Soviet nations were paying far less, and they vowed
not to pay a “non-market” price.
The threat raises the prospect of a repeat of the bitter New Year’s
price fight with Ukraine, during which Gazprom temporarily cut off
the former Soviet republic’s supplies this year.
The gas dispute, which was seen as retaliation for Ukraine’s
pro-Western policies, briefly disrupted supplies to Western Europe,
provoking alarm about reliance on Russian gas. A cutoff of gas to
Georgia would not affect Gazprom exports to Europe, which pass through
Ukraine and Belarus.
Since Kremlin-friendly Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych came to office
this year in Ukraine, Kiev has managed to limit the price for 2007
to $130.
Gazprom, which has been criticized as a tool of Kremlin policy, denied
that politics had played a role in the demands of Georgia. The Russian
gas behemoth says it has decided to end subsidized gas tariffs for
other former Soviet nations and is moving toward market prices.
Russian ally Armenia is paying a price for Russian gas of $110 that
will stay fixed until the end of 2008.
But Medvedev said this was negotiated last year and the agreement
included clauses handing control of key energy facilities to Gazprom,
including the Armenian segment of a planned pipeline bringing Iranian
gas to the country, which is due to open later this year.
Neighboring Belarus, whose authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko
has signed a loose union treaty with Russia, faces a fourfold rise
in gas prices to $200, although Gazprom is believed to be willing to
compromise if the country hands over 50 percent of the state pipeline
through which Russian gas transits to Western Europe.
Relations between Tbilisi and its former imperial master Moscow have
been frosty because of Georgia’s decision to align itself with the
West and seek membership in NATO and the European Union.
Ties suddenly worsened after Georgia detained four alleged Russian
spies in late September and Russian authorities retaliated with a
sweeping transport and postal blockade and a crackdown on Georgian
businesses and migrants in Russia. The remittances they send home
total hundreds of millions of dollars a year and are important for
the struggling Georgian economy.

LITHUANIAN REPS DELIVERING LECTURES TO ARMENIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ON FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
Baltic News Service
November 7, 2006 Tuesday 11:56 PM EET
Representatives of the Lithuanian Prosecutor General’s Office and
Special Investigation Service are delivering lectures to Armenian
law enforcement officers on ways to combat corruption.
Algimantas Kliunka, the chief prosecutor of the Organized Crime and
Corruption Investigation Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office,
Juozas Sakela and Ceslovas Bakasenas of the Special Investigation
Service are currently in Yerevan.
The Lithuanian officers intend to share Lithuania’s experience
in investigating corruption cases as well as in preparation and
implementation of national anti-corruption public education measures.
Armenia, just like other Eastern region countries, is strengthening
anti-corruption efforts.
Lithuanian officers have earlier delivered such lectures to Azerbaijani
law enforcement officers.
According to a survey by Transparency International, the Corruption
Perception Index (CPI) of Lithuania in 2006 stands at 4.8, which
shows that Lithuania has problems with changing its image of a
corrupt country.
However, Caucasus countries have even more problems in this area.
Armenia’s CPI score is 2.9, Georgia’s – 2.8, Azerbaijan’s – 2.4.
On the ten-point scale, 0 means absolute corruption, while 10 indicates
minimal corruption.

ANGER AT ‘OFFENSIVE’ KEBAB BAN
Birmingham Post, UK
November 7, 2006, Tuesday
First Edition
Armenians in Glendale, California, are trying to skewer the city’s
ban on outdoor restaurant grilling, saying it is an offence to the
kebab culture.
But efforts to overturn it have stalled in the city council.
Glendale, whose 85,000 Armenian residents comprise the largest such
population in the US, is 40 per cent Armenian and Armenian-American.
Last year, voters elected three Armenians to the five-member city
council, partly on an agenda to remove the outdoor grilling ban. But
they have been unable to win the four votes needed for passage.
That annoys Armenians who say indoor gas grills simply cannot do
justice to their traditional cuisine.
Vrej Sarkissian says it takes more than salt, pepper, onions and olive
oil to make a decent kebab. He cooks the skewered meat on charcoal
outside his restaurant.
“People can always tell the difference,” said Sarkissian, owner of
Anoush Banquets & Catering. “They want the original flavour of home.”
“It’s what our culture is about,” said his brother Sacco. “It’s great,
because they’re able to hold on to their heritage. They haven’t been
forced to Americanise.”
The ban may have a chilling effect on the city’s dining, city
councilman Ara Najarian said.
“Most Armenians are highly sophisticated, and they demand the best,”
he told the Los Angeles Times. “It’s developed into a gourmet war
between these folks. I once saw a place serve a flaming rack of lamb.
I think we all know that burgers on the grill taste better than on
the frying pan.”
But mayor Dave Weaver, who opposes lifting the ban, accused
his colleagues of playing “the race card”. “We’re portrayed as
anti-Armenian, and that’s so far off the mark,” he said.

TURKISH SCEPTICISM
European Report
November 7, 2006
Turkey is bracing itself for a critical European Commission report on
its progress towards joining the EU, something which could further
reduce the Turkish public’s dwindling trust in the EU. “We are in a
climate where Turkey feels besieged and the Turkish public views every
EU requirement as unreciprocated concessions and interprets them as
dishonesty and even ill-will on the EU’s part,” Professor Dogu Ergil,
an Ankara-based political analyst, told AFP.
The sour mood clearly showed in a recent survey: only 32.2% of the
people polled said that Turkey should join the EU while 25.6% said
it should not. In a survey by the same institute in 2004, 67.5% said
that Turkey should definitely join the EU while 57.4% expressed the
same view in a poll in September 2005.
The 8 November report is likely to add to the disillusionment of the
Turks. It is expected to issue harsh criticism on several issues,
most notably the divided island of Cyprus and freedom of expression.
The moves in France to push through a law penalising anyone who denies
that the killings of Armenians in 1915-1917 constituted genocide
and the removal of Turkish-origin candidates from Dutch electoral
lists for refusing to recognise the massacres as genocide “have led
to the impression that even if Turkey fulfills all EU requirements,
there is no guarantee that it will become a member”, said Ergil.

WHY THE EUROPEAN UNION NEEDS TURKEY
By Guler Sabanci
Financial Times (London, England)
November 7, 2006 Tuesday
Asia Edition 1
Turkey has been an integral part the twists and turns of European
history for 700 years. She has had her good days and bad days, she has
played with strong hands and weak hands, but she has always been an
influential player at the table of European politics. Our countries
know each other rather well.
We should remember this long history of engagement when discussing
Turkey’s European Union membership negotiations, which formally began
just last year. An EU report on the progress of the talks, due to be
released tomorrow, is being seen by some as a “crisis point”. Yet
there will be no vote on accepting Turkey as a full member of the
union for at least another decade.
The progress report is important but must be seen in this context. It
is an interim document that underlines what still remains to be done
as opposed to celebrating what has been achieved. By its very nature
it cannot do justice to the profound importance of these talks when
it comes to facing the global issues of tomorrow.
The main challenges facing humanity over the coming century cannot
be tackled at the level of a single nation state. Climatic changes,
potential pandemics, the gap between rich and poor, security and
immigration all are problems that require a governance system that
covers significantly more than current sovereign areas. The EU is a
vaguely understood, but courageous, search for such a new governance
structure. My country has to be a part of this. Turning inward and
trying to close the world out is a backward step, both for the EU
and Turkey.
The strategic importance of Turkey within Europe is undeniable. Her
experience with multi-ethnic and multi-denominational governance
structures, geographic position, historical ties with and knowledge of
areas to its south and east, its young population, access to energy
and control of water resources make Turkey a critical player in the
emerging EU.
The main problem is political. Economic fears are often cited but
those arguments are quite empty. For sure, the current rules of the
EU would require a transfer of resources to Turkey for about 10 to 15
years. However, in plain business terms the discounted present value
of Turkey’s contributions to an ageing Europe beyond that period is
greater than the outlay. In the long run, in economic terms Europe
needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe.
We are moving towards a lofty goal but the road there is narrow and
leaves little room for manoeuvre. After 700 years of dealing with
each other, all parties can point to historical reasons for caution.
As the process is not really one of “negotiating” but checking to
see if Turkey fulfils certain conditions for entry, it is by its
very nature unilateral. Any unilateral process is open to all sorts
of misunderstandings that need a conscious effort to prevent or undo.
There are some principles to follow that will make this process easier.
First, unilateral does not – should not – mean “arbitrary” or
“variable”. If it is seen that way the “candidate” may lose interest.
Something of this nature has been happening to Turkish public opinion,
in particular with respect to Cyprus. After the accession of a
divided Cyprus to the EU – in spite of the Greek Cypriot rejection of
the United Nations plan supported by the EU – the agreement whereby
sanctions on North Cyprus were to be lifted as a first step seems to
have been forgotten. Yet the demands on Turkey remain.
Second, there is a need to find a way of providing “wiggle room” for
all parties to allow politicians to win the support of their public.
It is in no one’s interest to push any party into a corner from which
they cannot emerge.
Third, the EU must avoid blatant asymmetry. Turkey can not be chastised
for parts of its penal code that may inhibit freedom of expression
while member states try to criminalise historical debate about what
happened to Armenian and Turkish communities during the first world war
in a manner that inhibits free speech and research to expose the truth.
Fourth, there is a need to keep “pressure” in the system to ensure
that the requisite reforms are being implemented, in particular the
legal protection of the individual. This should not be hard as there
are many non-governmental organisations in Turkey pushing for such
reforms irrespective of the EU talks.
Most important there is a need for sincerity, an honest effort on both
sides to arrive at a successful result, Turkey’s accession as a full
member. It is unfortunate that pandering to domestic political concerns
has led to suspicions that the ongoing process may be insincere,
with member states going through the motions in full knowledge that
they have a preference for an outcome other than full membership.
In spite of all the fears over a significant setback, I am optimistic
that the talks will eventually reach a successful conclusion. A number
of things can, and will, change in the next decade.
Politicians will come and go and old fears will be faced by new
concerns. Our old continent has made errors of judgment in its long
history but seldom has it been unable to sense where its true interests
lie over an extended period of time.
The writer is chairman and managing director of Sabanci Group, the
Turkish conglomerate.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress