Month: March 2007

PanARMENIAN.Net

RA Defense Minister departing for France March 10
09.03.2007 18:24 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ March 10 the Armenian delegation led by Secretary of
the Security Council at the RA President, Defense Minister Serge
Sargsyan will depart for France on a formal visit. As RA Defense
Minister’s Spokesman, col. Seyran Shahsuvaryan told PanARMENIAN.Net,
the Armenian delegation will meet French Defense Minister Michele
Alliot-Marie and chief of Chief of the Defense Staff, General
Jean-Louis Georgelin. The delegation members are also expected to
attend the National School of Military Police. March 13 Serge Sargsyan
will meet with universally known singer Charles Aznavour. March 14 the
delegation will return to Yerevan.

AZG Armenian Daily #044, 10/03/2007

ARMENIA’S FOREIGN POLICY

Iran Issue not Discussed Specially on Oskanian-Rice Meeting

Making a brief report on his recent visits abroad Foreign Minister of
Armenia Vardan Oskanian also said that a visit to Switzerland is
scheduled. In Switzerland Oskanian is to take part in a Human Rights
Protection Commission, to meet with the Swiss authorities and with
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov. On April the visit of
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to Armenia is planned.

Mr. Oskanian said that the latest US Department of State report on
human rights is now being thoroughly studied by the government of
Armenia. He said that in general the report represents the negative
and positive facts in Armenia rather objectively, but still there are
certain mistakes which are to be corrected. The situation of human
rights in Armenia will be once more represented to the world society
on the meeting of the Human Rights Protection Commission by Vardan
Oskanian. The Minister said that in his speech he will mostly refer to
the legislation reforms in Armenia, its challenges in that sphere, to
human rights issues in Karabakh, to the question of Armenian graves
desecration in Nakhijevan and the murder of Hrant Dink.

Referring to the theme of GUAM "Frozen Conflicts Resolution",
Mr. Oskanian said that it is accepted negatively by most of the
countries interested ion the Karabakh conflict settlement. "They all
find the resolution unnecessary and that it can complicate the
settlement of the Karabakh conflict. We tried to represent to the UN
Secretary General all the negative consequences of adopting the
resolution and Armenia’s possible position in case it takes place",
said the Minister.

Oskanian also informed that on his meeting with US Secretary of State
Condoleeza Rice the issue of opening the Armenian-Turkish border was
discussed. Mr. Oskanian assured that the United States are indeed
interested in opening the border and will be consistent in achieving
it. The issue of Nagorno-Karabakh more detailed was considered on a
meeting with Minsk Group Co-Chair Matthew Bryza. After this meeting
the Armenian Foreign Minister once again met with Ms. Rice and
discussed the expected Oskanian-Mamedyarov meeting in
Geneva. Mr. Oskanian stated that the preparations for the meeting have
gone well and in case there are no surprises from Azerbaijan, the
meeting promises to be fruitful.

To a question by "Azg" reporter whether Mr. Oskanian discussed the
Iran issue with Secretary of State Rice, he answered negatively. To a
question about mutual compromise in the Karabakh conflict the Foreign
Minister said that all those issues are regulated by a document,
approved by the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. He rued that
statements by some Azerbaijani leaders run in discord with the
document, in which Armenia puts trust and believes it will be basement
for final settlement of the conflict.

By Agavni Haroutiunian

AZG Armenian Daily #044, 10/03/2007

Armenia-Turkey Relationships

SARAFIAN REFUSED TO COOPERATE WITH TURKEY

On February 23 "Azg" reported that head of the "Komitas" historical
studies institute Ara Sarafian had responded to the proposal of
cooperation by Yususf Halacoglu, president o the Turkish Historical
Science Union. This information was derived from Halacoglu’s statement
to "Sabah" newspaper, Turkey.

On March 9 "Azg" came to know from the Turkish television that
A. Sarafaian resigned his proposal of joint study of the Armenian
Genocide without pre-conditions, which he made in reply of
Halacaoglu’s proposal. On a press conference Halacoglu said that
Sarafian personally expressed regret about standing back from the
project and explained it by the pressure of the Armenian society,
which he was unable to ignore.

By H. Chaqrian

CollectifVAN.org, France
March 10 2007

Report

Missing Ottoman Archival Records on the Armenian Genocide, 1915

by Nora Vosbigian

London, 7 March 2007: Today the Gomidas Institute issued its third
statement on its proposal to work on a case study with Turkish
historians regarding the treatment of Armenians in Harput in 1915.1
The Institute’s latest statement follows a comment made by Dr. Yusuf
Halaço?lu, the head of the Turkish Historical Society, that vital
Ottoman records on the 1915 deportation of Armenians–including in
Harput–do not exist in Turkish archives today.

These "non-existent" records are directly related to two Ottoman
decrees which Turkish official historians have claimed regulated the
deportation and resettlement of Ottoman Armenians in 1915. These were
the 30 May 1915 regulations on deportations,2 and the 10 June 1915
regulations on the resettlement of deportees, the liquidation of
their properties, and their compensation in their places of exile.3

The Gomidas Institute had asked, based on these regulations, to
examine the registers showing details of Armenians who were deported
from the Harput plain, as well as the resettlement records accounting
for the fate of these deportees further a field. According to these
regulations, all deported Armenian had to be registered, person by
person (or household by household), village by village; the
properties of deportees had to be recorded and liquidated; when the
deported were resettled in their places of exile, they had to be
compensated in proportion to their original assets. According to
these regulations, Ottoman officials had to generate meticulous
deportation, resettlement and compensation records which accounted
for Armenians who were deported in 1915.

On Monday 26 February 2007 Dr. Halaço?lu appeared on CNN- Turk’s
"Manþet" programme where he stated, categorically, that the Ottoman
records the Gomidas Institute had asked to examine did not exist.
Halaço?lu stated that : "He [Sarafian] well knows about the archives.
He also knows that there are no records for each village listing
persons by name. There are no such records. If there were, they would
not pose a problem for us. It would be better to produce them."4 To
date Dr. Halaço?lu has not contacted and explained himself to the
Gomidas Institute.

It is not clear how Dr. Halaço?lu could make such a categorical
statement about the non-existence of the Ottoman records we had asked
for, given the texts of the Ottoman regulations governing
deportations in 1915, or the fact that there are many Ottoman
archives in Turkey, and not all Ottoman records in these archives are
catalogued. Until there is further clarification, Dr. Halaço?lu’s
statement only raises some fundamental questions:

1. Were Ottoman regulations on the 1915 deportations implemented
according to the letter of the law? If so, why are we told that the
registers related to this mass transfer of people are missing? Are
all records missing, for the whole Empire, in both local as well as
central archives?

2. If these regulations were not implemented, how was the movement of
Armenians, the liquidation of their properties, and the resettlement
of deportees regulated? Is it conceivable that none of these
regulations were implemented for the whole of the Ottoman Empire from
Erzeroum to Yozgat, Izmit and Kayseri? If so, where is the archival
trail in Ottoman archives associated with the actual course of
events?

3. Is it possible that no records were kept for either deportation or
resettlement? If so, was this the case for the whole of the Ottoman
Empire, and why were no records kept?

4. If records were kept and then destroyed, why and when were they
destroyed? And were they destroyed for the whole of the Ottoman
Empire, in both local as well as central archives in Turkey?

5. Is it possible that Dr. Halaço?lu might be mistaken? Might some of
the records we have asked for exist? Is it possible that there might
be deportation records, as well as records related to the liquidation
of Armenian properties, but no corresponding resettlement records?

According to Ara Sarafian (Gomidas Institute, London), "Primary
sources outside of Turkey indicate that the 1915 deportation of
Armenians and the liquidation of their properties were regulated by
Ottoman state authorities. Armenians were deported under the auspices
of Ottoman officials. And most deportees were killed through
privations and outright massacres on their way or in their places of
exile (most notably Der Zor). Our sources indicate that there never
was a resettlement programme as historians defending the official
Turkish thesis suggest."

The Gomidas Institute hopes that Dr. Halaço?lu will explain why he
thinks that the Ottoman deportation and resettlement registers the
Gomidas Institute requested do not exist–especially those on Harput
and its environs.

NOTES

1. For the first two Gomidas Institute statements see
se.htm and
se.htm For the third
statement (in Turkish) see
eTurkish.htm

2 Ottoman Ministry of Interior, Department of Settlement of Tribes
and Immigrants, "Regulations Related to Settlement and Board and
Lodging and Other Affairs of Armenians Relocated to Other Places
Because of War Conditions and Emergency Political Requirements, May
30, 1915" in Turkish Prime Ministry Directorate-General of Press and
Information, Documents on Ottoman Armenians, Vol. 2 [n.d.], Document
no. 12, pp. 91-93. See copy
.htm

3 "The Regulation Concerning the Management of the Land and
Properties Belonging to Armenians Who Have Been Sent Elsewhere as a
Result of the State of War and the Extraordinary Political Situation"
in Turkish Prime Ministry Directorate-General of Press and
Information, Documents [on Ottoman Armenians], Vol. 1 [n.d.],
Document no. 28, pp. 76-80. See copy
tions.htm

4 The Turkish transcript of what Dr. Halacoglu said is as follows:
"Ar?ivlerin nas?l oldu?unu kendisi [Sarafian] gayet iyi biliyor.
Orada her köyden tek tek, isim isim kimlerin nakledilmi? oldu?unu
bulamayaca??n? kendisi de biliyor. Öyle bir kay?t zaten yok. olmu?
olsa zaten bizim için problem olmaz, daha güzel ortaya konabilir."

Info Collectif VAN – – Info Collectif VAN –
– Le Collectif VAN vous propose le Communiqué de
Presse en anglais de l’Institut Gomidas, en date du 7 mars 2007.
L’historien Ara Sarafian avait récemment proposé au Professeur Yusuf
Halaçoglu, l’historien officiel d’Ankara, d’étudier ensemble les
déportations arméniennes de 1915, en se basant sur le cas de la ville
de Harput (un des centres intellectuels et économiques arméniens les
plus importants avant 1915). Nora Vosbigian explique ici comment Ara
Sarafian a vu, après l’acceptation initiale d’Halaçoglu, son offre
refusée pour cause d’absence d’archives turques sur le sujet…
Halaçoglu lui, s’exprime sur Atv channel et Hurriyet pour dire que
Sarafian a finalement fait machine arrière, pour cause de pressions
de la diaspora arménienne… Le Communiqué du Gomidas Institute
apporte un éclairage très intéressant sur le sérieux des propositions
turques d’ouvrir les archives ottomanes sur le génocide arménien de
1915… No comment.

; id=8488

AZG Armenian Daily #044, 10/03/2007

Armenia-Azerbaijan Relations

ALIEV REPEATING HIS OLD STORY ALREADY LEARNT BY HEART

On a press conference in Baku French Co-Chair of the
OSCE Minsk Group stated that a number of conditions
must be provided before Azeri refugees can return to
Karabakh. "Trend" agency reports that one of the
conditions is establishment of Azerbaijani
administrative representation on the "occupied"
territories. Mr. Fassier rued that there is a problem
of persuading Armenians and Azeris to live side by
side in peace.

Meanwhile the Minsk Group Representative is perhaps
trying to impose the idea of peace and neighborhood
upon the two peoples, Azerbaijani head of state is
doing everything to lay all those efforts in vain. On
the first forum of Turkish and Azeri Diaspora
organizations, Ilham Aliev said that Armenia must
change its policy, set free the occupied Azerbaijani
lands of Karabakh and resign its claim for recognizing
the Armenian Genocide.

Aliev also declared that meeting these requirements
will benefit Armenia itself first of all. Turkish
Prime Minister erdogan, who also was [resent to the
meeting said that the Karabakh problem is a bleeding
wound of Turkey. It is reported that the whole meeting
in general was devoted to Armenia, the Armenians and
their relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan, as one
could think that the Turkish peoples have always had
their only problem with the Armenians.

By Agavni Harutiunian

Armenian paper looks at parties’ chances in forthcoming elections

Hayots Ashkharh, Yerevan
6 Mar 07

Armenian newspaper Hayots Ashkharh has classified 27 parties running
in the election accordindg to their chances to win parliamentary
seats. The paper named six favourites – three pro-government and
three opposition parties that would very likely to win seats in
parliament. The following is the text of the report by Armen
Tsaturyan in Armenian newspaper Hayots Ashkharh published on 6 March
headlined "Parties form four groups"

Twenty-seven political parties and one bloc wish to stand in the
parliamentary election.

It should be noted that 28 is not a large number because we have about
70 parties. These 27 parties and one bloc can be divided into four
groups.

The first group is the one that consists of the six major contenders;
the second group comprises parties that have chances to overcome the
5-per-cent threshold [required for entering parliament]; the third
group comprises those who run under the Olympic Games slogan
"participation is that really matters"; and the fourth group consists
of those who plan to stir up trouble or simply help others.

We believe that the list of the main contenders includes the three
pro-government parties – the RPA [Republican Party of Armenia], the PA
[Prosperous Armenia party] and the ARFD [Armenian Revolutionary
Federation – Dashnaktsutyun], and three opposition parties – the PPA
[People’s Party of Armenia], the National Unity party and the Orinats
Yerkir party. The Repbulican Party of Armenia and the Prosperous
Armenia have the greatest chances among these parties.

However, if the RPA’s results are predictable, the Prosperous
Armenia’s the results would greatly depend on how the race progress
for this party. It is hard to predict one month ahead of the race how
the PA’s supporters is going to behave on the voting day. As for the
chances of the pro-government ARFD and the three opposition forces –
PPA, National Unity and Orinats Yerkir – they all currently have some
10 per cent. Each of these parties would try to do everything they
can, but only the Orinats Yerkir would go to the end, refusing to be
content with modest results.

Some of the parties in the second group – the ULP [United Labour
Party], People’s Party and the Heritage party – have chances to
overcome the 5-per-cent threshold.

The third group consists of what can be called "Olympic athletes," who
have no serious chances to reach the 5-per-cent threshold. What they
are going to do is to make maximum efforts in certain election
districts to help party leaders get elected under the
first-past-the-post system, or simply promote their
ideologies. Khosrov Harutyunyan’s Christian Democratic Revival party,
Manuk Gasparyan’s Democratic Path, Shavarsh Kocharyan’s National
Democratic Party, Aram G. Sargsyan’s Democratic Party of Armenia,
Hovhannes Hovhannisyan’s Liberal Progressive Party, the Pan-Armenian
National Movement, the Communist Party, Samvel Babayan’s Dashink, and
the Republic party are among them. The last three do not consider
themselves to be "Olymipic athletes," something that in the case of
the Communist Party can be explained by "age syndrome." But such a
loss of reality is incomprehensible to regular folks in cases of the
Dashink and the Republic party.

The fourth group includes parties which have absolutely no chances to
be elected under either the first-past-the-post or the proportional
system, neither do they wish to participate in the race under the
"Olympic system" because they have nothing to say. They are entering
the race with the goal to support other powerful forces, or – which is
even worse – to play a part in a play staged by foreign powers. The
pro-Western Impeachment bloc as well as the New Times party, a
specialist in staging "shows" that are allegedly ordered by Moscow,
represent the extreme ends of this poorly disguised army of
"lobbyists." The Marxist Party, the Progressive Party of Armenia, the
National Unity, the Youth Party and some others will be "milder"
versions of those mentioned above, with the only difference that they
are orientated towards Armenia and not towards foreign powers.

It is not the programme or ideological principles of the parties that
would be in the core of the forthcoming race but the struggle for
power between the major political forces in one camp and the
externally created "fifth column," which will be used to influence
Armenia in the 12 May voting.

The clash of these extremely opposite trends is inevitable; therefore,
the forthcoming election promises to be a serious test for Armenia and
its political system.
From: Baghdasarian

Swissinfo, Switzerland
March 10 2007

Swiss and Turkish press mull Perinçek verdict

The Swiss media have taken a critical look at trial of Turkish
politician Doðu Perinçek, found guilty on Friday of racial
discrimination over Armenian genocide comments.

In Turkey reactions were strong, with some newspapers condeming with
the verdict. The Turkish Foreign Ministry said it was "saddened" by
the trial’s result.

Perinçek was found guilty by a court in Lausanne, western
Switzerland, of racial discrimination for denying the 1915 Armenian
massacre was genocide. He was handed a suspended fine of SFr9,000
($7,336).

The politician, the head of the left-wing Turkish Workers’ Party,
came before the court after calling the genocide "an international
lie" during a public speech in Lausanne in July 2005.

Armenians maintain the mass killings in 1915 were genocide, a charge
Turkey disputes.

Under the Swiss penal code any act of denying, belittling or
justifying genocide is a violation of the country’s anti-racism
legislation.

The Turkish politician said he would appeal against the verdict.

"Doðu Perinçek had to be punished," wrote the Zurich-based
Tages-Anzeiger on Saturday, adding that Perinçek had deliberately
provoked the trial. It also criticised Perinçek’s "overbearing and
arrogant behaviour".

But it warned that the verdict was not water tight, raising doubts
over whether the appeal court would follow the Lausanne judge’s
reasoning.

Sense and nonsense

Another Zurich newspaper, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ), had mixed
views.

The trial had not made sense because a Turkish politician from a
minor party had been judged on behaviour more relevant in his own
country, it said. In addition the trial had given Perinçek a platform
and blighted relations with Turkey.

But the judge had also delivered a consistent judgement, despite
being criticised for using historians’ views rather than medical or
technical knowledge, wrote the editorialist.

"Nevertheless, the government is still free to avoid using the world
"genocide" out of foreign (trade) considerations," it noted.

The Geneva-based Le Temps described the judgement as one on memory.

"The Lausanne judgement does not make history. It gives the Armenians
a protection of [their] memory that has already been recognised for
the Shoah victims," it wrote in its editorial.

However, the mass-circulation Blick said it was time for the
government to recognise the mass killings as genocide after the
Lausanne court’s "courageous" verdict.

Referring to Swiss Justice Minister Christoph Blocher’s controversial
attempts to revise the racism law, Blick said Blocher would be better
off recognising the genocide than changing legislation.

"If he keeps on, the other six [cabinet members] should at least show
him the red card for this totally unnecessary messing around," said
the newspaper.

For their part, Swiss Turks interviewed in the Basler Zeitung were
restrained in their reaction, with most welcoming the trial as a way
of opening up debate.

Turkish reaction

The press reaction comes a day after the Turkish Foreign Ministry
sharply criticised the Lausanne verdict, saying it ignored "freedom
of expression". In a statement, the ministry said the Swiss legal
system and the press had been biased.

"The court case was inappropriate, groundless and controversial in
every sense … The verdict cannot be accepted by the Turkish
people," said the ministry in a statement on Friday.

The Saturday editions of Turkish newspapers also had harsh words. The
nationalist press was particularly critical.

"Dishonourable Switzerland" screamed the headline of Gözcü, which
went on to say that the verdict was another proof of European
hypocrisy – Europeans underline the importance of freedom of opinion
but were quick to condemn it.

For its part, the right-leaning Yeni Cag newspaper wrote that
Perinçek’s verdict meant "the whole Turkish nation had been
punished".

Other parts of the media were less severe, but were still widespread
in their coverage. Hürriyet quoted Perinçek as saying his trial had
started a debate in Switzerland over how to judge historical events,
but that he would go to the European Court of Human Rights with his
case.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AZG Armenian Daily #044, 10/03/2007

Armenian Genocide

FRENCH LAW ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE DENIAL NOT CONDEMNED

The European Parliament refused to condemn the French law about
denying the armenian Genocide. Panarmenian net, referring to the
Armenian Union of Europe, says that the condemning bill was not
included in the Europarliament agenda.

By Agavni Haroutiunian

Azeri leader demands Armenian withdrawal from occupied territories

ITV, Baku
9 Mar 07

President Ilham Aliyev has demanded that Armenia withdraw from
Azerbaijan’s occupied territories and give up its "baseless" claims
against Turkey, warning that Baku may reiterate by laying territorial
claims to Yerevan.

"We are not laying territorial claims to Armenia. However, we can do so
given that the territory which is today’s Armenia is ancient
Azerbaijani-Turkish land," Aliyev told a meeting of Azerbaijani and
Turkish diaspora leaders in Baku on 9 March.

The meeting was also attended by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat.

"If they [Armenian leaders] care about the future of their own people,
they should change their policy. They should unconditionally withdraw
from Azerbaijan’s occupied territories and give up the baseless claims
against Turkey. Otherwise, Armenia’s own fate may come under question,"
President Aliyev told an applauding audience.

Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Switzerland
March 10 2007

Turkish politician fined over genocide denial
A Swiss district court has found a Turkish politician, Doðu Perinçek,
guilty of racial discrimination for denying the 1915 Armenian
massacre was genocide.

The court in Lausanne agreed with the prosecutor’s demand and handed
Perinçek a suspended fine of SFr9,000 ($7,336) as well as a one:off
financial penalty of SFr3,000.

The court also ruled that Perinçek would have to pay SFr1,000 to the
Swiss:Armenian Association as a symbolic gesture.

The politician, whose left:wing Turkish Workers’ Party has no seats
in the Turkish parliament, was brought to court after calling the
genocide "an international lie" during a public speech in Lausanne in
July 2005.

Under the Swiss penal code any act of denying, belittling or
justifying genocide is a violation of the country’s anti:racism
legislation.

And Lausanne is the capital of canton Vaud, one of two Swiss cantons
along with Geneva where the parliaments have voted in recent years to
recognise the Armenian massacre as genocide.

Judge Pierre:Henri Winzap accused Perinçek of being "a racist" and
"an arrogant provocateur" who was familiar with Swiss law on
historical revisionism.

According to Winzap, the politician’s action "appears to have racist
and nationalist motives". The Armenian genocide is "an established
historical fact according to the Swiss public", he added.

Perinçek’s lawyers have called into question the authority of the
district court to hear such a case. The Turkish politician said he
would appeal against the verdict, which he called "racist and
imperialist".

He admitted in court earlier in the week that there had been
massacres but said there could be no talk of genocide. "I have not
denied genocide because there was no genocide," he argued.

Armenians maintain the mass killings in 1915 were genocide, a charge
Turkey disputes.

Reactions
Sarkis Shahinian, co:president of the Swiss:Armenian Association,
said there was "great relief" among the community. Shahinian said it
was deplorable that the Turkish state had let itself get involved
with ultra:nationalists like Perinçek.

"It is a big problem. It is necessary that Turkey recognizes the
genocide."

Ferai Tinç, a foreign affairs columnist with Turkey’s Hurriyet
newspaper, told swissinfo the case had been widely followed in the
country because it was the first time a Turkish citizen had been
tried abroad for expressing their opinion.

"We see it as a trial of freedom of thought, and freedom of opinion,"
Tinç said.

"Whether we agree or not with Perinçek, we find these type of [penal]
articles against freedom of opinion dangerous because we are
struggling in our country to achieve freedom of thought."

Tinç added that the decision to make Perinçek stand trial would
"create a problem of confidence" between Switzerland and Turkey.

Shaky ground
Ties between Bern and Ankara are already on shaky ground.

Tensions reached a peak in 2005 after Turkey criticised the Swiss
authorities’ decision to investigate Perinçek. Ankara followed it up
by cancelling an official trip to Turkey by the then Swiss economics
minister, Joseph Deiss.

The next event to raise eyebrows was a visit to Turkey by Swiss
Justice Minister Christopher Blocher last October when he announced
that Switzerland’s anti:racism legislation was incompatible with
freedom of expression.

The comments were welcomed by Ankara but caused a storm of protest in
Switzerland.

Blocher came in for renewed criticism by the media and some
politicians last weekend when he received his Turkish counterpart
Cemil Cicek in Bern. According to the justice ministry, bilateral
issues ? and not the trial ? were discussed.

On Friday Blocher said he did not want to comment on the trial
directly, but did not expect the verdict to lead to a serious
deterioration in Swiss:Turkish relations.