Month: May 2008

NKR NA PERMANENT COMMISSION’S CHAIRMAN ELECTED

DeFacto Agency
May 15 2008
Armenia

YEREVAN, 15.05.08. DE FACTO. On May 14, voting by secret ballot in
the course of a current plenary sitting, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic
/NKR/ National Assembly elected Garik Grigorian as the Chairman of the
Permanent Commission for State and Legal Issues. The position became
vacant after the Commission’s former Chairman Yuri Hayrapetian had
been appointed as an ombudsman.

According to the decision of the NKR CEC, deputy mandate of
Yuri Hayrapetian, who was elected to the Parliament from Artsakh
Democratic Party /ADP/, was suspended ahead of time. According to the
same decision Arkady Soghomonian was recognized as a deputy of the
National Assembly elected by proportional representation by ADP list.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ONCE MORE ABOUT PRINCIPAL POSITION OF AZERBAIJAN ON RESOLUTION OF NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT

Today.Az
cs/44990.html
May 15 2008
Azerbaijan

Day.Az correspondent asked deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Araz
Azimov to voice principal position of Azerbaijan on the resolution
of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict once again.

A.Azimov stated that Azerbaijan’s position is quite clear, as
it has been repeatedly voiced on the highest level clearly and
exactly. Nevertheless, the main principal positions can be shortly
formulated in the following manner:

1. The conflict should be settled in the framework of the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan and this approach has no alternative.

2. The conflict solution should envision not only the liberation
of seven regions, surrounding Nagorno Karabakh. The main task is
the full restoration of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and
preservation of Nagorno Karabakh within Azerbaijan to ensure its due
status. The return of seven regions around Nagorno Karabakh does not
ensure the complete resolution of the conflict.

3. Self-determination is only possible within the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan. International law envisions
application of the said principle only in the form of internal
self-determination. International law does not envision and imply any
grounds for separation of a part of a state without agreement of the
said state;

4. The definition of the status of Nagorno Karabakh requires return of
Azerbaijani population, driven out of their native lands, and ensuring
their security, like to the Armenian population. Only after that the
definition of the status would be possible;

5. The road, passing Lachin, should be rendered for the equal and
mutual use of both parties. This would guarantee normal, safe and
stable functioning of this transport communication.

6. For development of Nagorno Karabakh, Azerbaijan is ready to
undertake all measures, favorable for both communities, that will
reside in this region. The main obstacle for passing to this stage
is Armenia’s occupation of the Azerbaijani lands;

7. Principles of return of Azerbaijanis to Nagorno Karabakh, use
of the road, passing Lachin by both parties, and definition of the
status of the region within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan
should be included in the draft main principles of the resolution of
the conflict. Only in this case will the discussions be effective;

8. Nagorno Karabakh should remain an integral part of Azerbaijan. This
will promote the resolution of the conflict and restoration of normal
ties between Armenia and Azerbaijan. If Armenia choses any other way,
it will gain nothing, except for animosity and isolation.

ASYLUM CASE REOPENED ON TRANSCRIPTION ERROR
Bob Egelko

San Francisco Chronicle
i?f=/c/a/2008/05/15/BAI210LPON.DTL
May 15 2008
CA

SAN FRANCISCO — When Svetlana Grigoryan was presenting her case
for political asylum in the United States, she testified through an
interpreter that a crowd of people attacked her family in her native
Armenia in 1995, badly injuring her and killing her 13-year-old son,
"because my mother was a cook."

At least that’s how it read in the transcript of the 2003 hearing,
which prompted the immigration courts and a federal appeals court to
rule that Grigoryan had failed to show she was a victim of political
persecution.

Then an immigration lawyer took a look at her case, talked to
Grigoryan, and figured out that the transcript was wrong – she’d
actually testified that she was attacked "because my mother was
a Turk."

That made a difference. Turks slaughtered between 1 million and 1.5
million Armenians in the genocide of 1915-16. An Armenian who fled
the country after being assaulted because of her Turkish descent
could have a strong case for asylum.

On Monday, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco
told the U.S. Board of Immigration Appeals to reconsider Grigoryan’s
case and decide whether she had been persecuted. The "transcription
error … goes to the heart of her claim," said the court, which had
ruled against her in 2005.

"Now she can tell her story," said her attorney, Artem Sarian.

Grigoryan, who lives in the Los Angeles area, entered the United
States and applied for asylum in 1999. She said in her application
that she and her parents had been harassed by Armenians because her
mother was Turkish.

The family moved to Azerbaijan in the 1980s, but Grigoryan said she
was beaten and jailed there after war broke out with Armenia.

The family returned to Armenia in 1992 and Grigoryan became president
of an organization that helped soldiers wounded in the war. She said
a rivalry within the organization led to the January 1995 assault
that injured her and killed her son.

Grigoryan had difficulties in her asylum application, the appeals
court said, because her first lawyer filed written arguments that had
little to do with her case and virtually conceded she was ineligible
for asylum. A disciplinary agency in Connecticut, where the lawyer
practiced, cited him for unethical conduct in her case, the court said.

Sarian said Grigoryan contacted him in 2005, after the immigration
courts ordered her deported, and he looked at the case records. They
included the transcript of the 2003 hearing containing a transcription
mistake that was obvious, even though it had been overlooked by the
immigration judge, the immigration appeals board and Grigoryan’s
first lawyer, Sarian said.

"Nobody really cared about this person," he said.

GROUP OF RUSSIAN JOURNALISTS ARRIVED IN STEPANAKERT

DeFacto Agency
May 15 2008
Armenia

YEREVAN, 15.05.08. DE FACTO. A group of Russian journalists from
renowned Russian mass media arrived in Stepanakert. In part, the
group includes the representatives of Russia TV Channel, Russia Today,
RBK-daily and Independent newspaper.

As it became known, the visit is of acquaintance nature. May 14 the
Russian journalists were present at the sitting of the NKR National
Assembly.

IS MR. FEIN TALKING ABOUT GREECE?
Aris Anganos

Global Politician
e-turkey
May 15 2008
NY

The 3/24/08 article by Mr. Bruce Fein entitled "Greek Human Rights
Violations against its Turkish Minority in Western Thrace" demonstrates
a striking lack of knowledge of the situation on the ground in Greece,
particularly over the last 15 years.

Mr. Fein lists himself as a "Resident Scholar" at the Turkish
Coalition of America. Unfortunately, he does not seem to have done
much scholarly research on the subject because his article contains
several inaccuracies and distortions.

What is worse, the reference at the end of the article to the Islamic
world can be construed as an attempt to place the minorities’ issue in
the context of a "battle of civilizations." This is not only wrong and
obsolete in terms of a modern vision of a multicultural and tolerant
world, but also raises questions as to the real motives of the writer.

>From a Greek perspective, the aim is to smoothly integrate the members
of her Muslim minority – not only persons of Turkish origin – in the
political, social, educational, and economic life of the country
where they live, namely Greece, while preserving their religious,
linguistic, and cultural identity. The aim is definitely not to
isolate them in ghettos on the basis of their religious belief!

Regarding the "facts" that the author invokes, let me address them
one by one:

1. The term "Muslim minority" stems from the Lausanne Treaty of
1923 and the Agreement on the Exchange of Populations of 1923: not
all Muslims of Thrace are of Turkish origin, as the minority also
comprises Pomaks and Roma.

The Treaty of Lausanne has been governing the status of the Muslim
minority in Thrace since 1923. This has regrettably not been the case
in Turkey as far as her minorities are concerned, including the Greek
one. Successive Turkish governments have harassed Greek, Armenian,
and other minorities to the point of extinction. The once 100,000
strong thriving Greek minority of Istanbul was practically wiped
out in the September 1955 pogrom and its aftermath. The cultural and
physical abuse of the Armenians is well known and that of the Kurds
has recently come to the world’s attention. All these violations and
numerous others have been committed by a close ally of the U.S. and
a country aspiring to become a member of the European Union.

2. The reference to "salaries" allegedly paid only to Greek Christian
families with three children or more is not factually correct. The
special allowance is granted to all families of Greek citizens with
three or more children, regardless of religion or origin.

3. Mr. Fein refers to people who left the country permanently and lost
their citizenship. The applicable Article 19 of the Nationality Code,
which provided that any Greek citizen who left the country with no
intention of returning lost his or her citizenship, was repealed in
1988. Nowadays, there are less than 30 stateless people residing
in Thrace. These people have been granted Special Identity Cards
in accordance with the UN Convention of stateless persons and are
currently in the process of acquiring Greek citizenship.

4. The Muftis (religious practitioners) as in other countries
(Turkey included) are appointed on the basis of a procedure in
which prominent personalities, theology professors, and members of
the minority, are consulted. In addition to their religious duties
they also perform certain administrative and judicial functions in
the areas of family and inheritance law. The minority’s religious
rights are fully respected and can be exercised with no impediment:
apart from the 3 mufti offices, there are 300 mosques and 370 imams in
Thrace. Furthermore, in accordance with a newly adopted law, another
240 imams are in the process of being appointed to the Mufti offices.

This policy contrasts with the severe restrictions on the Orthodox
Patriarchate in Istanbul, which has been the seat of the Greek Orthodox
religion for centuries. The Patriarchate’s Theological School of
Halki has been closed and is prohibited from operating. Many of
the properties of the Patriarchate have been confiscated without
compensation.

5. Mr. Fein claims that the requirement that a political party must
receive 3 percent of the vote in the previous election to be included
in Parliament is discriminatory. This requirement applies to all
political parties. Similar percentages exist in other countries. As a
matter of fact, the required percentage in Turkey is 10 percent. It is
worth mentioning that the Muslim minority is usually represented in the
Greek parliament. Currently, there are two Muslim members of Parliament
while there are about 290 Muslims in prefectural and town councils.

6. As for education, education for the members of the minority is
provided in 215 primary and 4 secondary minority schools as well as 2
Koranic schools which operate in Thrace, employing around 400 Muslim
teachers. Courses are taught equally in Greek and Turkish. Turkish
language courses have been introduced, on a pilot basis, in some
public high schools, to serve the needs of the members of the minority.

To illustrate the alleged "plight" of the Muslim minority in Thrace,
Greece has not only implemented the Treaty of Lausanne obligations,
but has taken affirmative measures for the minority’s benefit in the
field of education. A quota for the admission of Muslim students
to Universities and Higher Technical Schools has been established
recently. By 2007, 469 students had benefited from it. Greece has
also introduced recently a similar quota for members of the Muslim
minority to take part in the examinations for the appointment and
employment in the public sector.

The affirmative measures were expanded to the financial situation
of the Muslim Foundations in Thrace: legislation has been enacted
to exempt them from submitting Tax Declarations on income and land
property up to January 1, 2007. Consequently, their accumulated
registered debts, fines, and existing mortgages by that date were
forgiven. The new law on the Muslim minority charitable foundations,
adopted by the Greek Parliament in February 2008, has improved the
legal framework governing their operation and provides inter alia,
for the election of their Governing Councils.

Reading about the "plundering" of the property of the foundations that
Mr. Fein mentions, I cannot help thinking of the situation prevailing
in the case of the Greek minority in Turkey, which is supposed to be
governed by the very same Treaty of Lausanne: 24 Foundations have been
seized, a significant number of properties has been confiscated under
various pretexts and in many cases sold to third persons. Mr. Fein
might be interested in examining the practices of the Turkish General
Directorate of Foundations.

Recalling the Treaty of Lausanne and the Helsinki Final Act principles
that the author evokes, one must ask whatever has become of the rights
of the Ecumenical Patriarchate based in Istanbul? The harassment
of the Patriarchate, the confiscation of its properties and the
requirement that the Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch be a Turkish
citizen are literally choking the ancient seat of the Greek Orthodox
Church. The parallel prohibition of the functioning of the Orthodox
Theological School of Halki thus assures the ultimate demise of the
Church in Turkey.

Whatever has become for the rights of minority education for the Greeks
in Turkey? Whatever has become of the minority education on the Greek
islands of Imvros and Tenedos which were ceded to Turkey in the Treaty
of Lausanne because they are at the mouth of the Dardanelles? Or the
self administration granted to these two islands by the Treaty of
Lausanne? The list of violations of that Treaty by Turkey is very long.

It would be worthwhile having a closer look at these issues and
pointing to the real injustices and not brining in notions of
"battles." These notions can only exacerbate issues and create
resentment which, I believe, serves neither the interests of Greece
nor those of Turkey. Surely, the creation of conflict along religious
lines between two major allies is something we would certainly not
like to see in the U.S.

Is Mr. Fein nostalgic for mentalities dating back to the dark days
of the collapsing Ottoman Empire? Or?

JOURNALIST ARAT DINK SHARES THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AWARD

BIA

May 15 2008
Turkey

Journalist Arat Dink and imprisoned Burmese monk U Gambira are among
the winners of Index on Censorship’s 2008 Freedom of Expression Awards,
which pay tribute to people around the world who have made outstanding
contributions to free expression.

Dink was awarded Index’s Guardian Journalism Award, which recognises
determined and brave journalism that often represents a different
point of view in the media.

As the editor of the Armenian paper "Agos", Dink has suffered
immensely for the "crime" of speaking out in Turkey about the Armenian
genocide. His father Hrant, who was editor of the paper before him,
was gunned down for giving an interview about the genocide. Arat
himself was given a one-year suspended sentence for daring to reprint
his late father’s words.

Index on Censorship commented, "The bravery of Arat Dink, and the
rest of the staff of ‘Agos’ in the face of draconian laws restricting
their freedom of expression, provides inspiration for journalists
throughout the world. In honouring Arat, we also commemorate the work
of his late father."

U.Gambira, the leader of the All Burma Monks Allliance, which
spearheaded the nationwide protests in September last year, won the
Bindmans Law and Campaigning Award. He was allegedly charged with
treason following the protests and is currently being held in Insein
prison in Rangoon.

WikiLeaks, a resource for anonymous whistleblowers and investigative
journalists, won the Economist New Media Award for facing down an
attempt by an investment bank to close it down.

Francisco Goldman took home the TR Fyvel Book Award for "The Art
of Political Murder: Who killed Bishop Gerardi?", an account of the
search for the killers of Guatemalan bishop Juan Gerardi.

And the Index Film Award went to "Ahlaam" ("Dreams"), a story of
three broken souls in Baghdad, Iraq in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein.

UNTRUTHS TARNISH HOLODOMOR TRAGEDY
John-Paul Himka

Kyiv Post
May 15 2008
Ukraine

Even after I earned a Ph.D. in history from the University of Michigan
and had been working as a researcher at the Canadian Institute of
Ukrainian Studies (CIUS) in Edmonton for several years, I was extremely
naive about how scholars arrived at estimates for major catastrophes
on the order of the Holocaust of the Jews or the Holodomor in Ukraine.

When I was a young man, most of what I read suggested that each of
these events took about six million lives. I thought that either the
murderers kept a tally of their victims or else it was a fairly simple
matter of subtracting the results of one census from another.

I began to realize the complexity of the issue in 1980. I was working
closely with a scholar from Poland who was a visiting professor at
CIUS, Janusz Radziejowski.

He had demographic training and was used to working with census
materials, and he offered a brief estimate of the population losses
from collectivization and famine.

The conclusion he came to was that there was a "demographic loss
of 9,263,000" Ukrainians in the USSR between 1926 and 1939. I was
astounded at this high number. I never realized, I said, that the
famine killed over 9 million people. He patiently explained to me
that a demographic loss is not the same as a death toll.

In addition to the latter, this number includes children not born to
those killed, other children not born for other reasons connected to
collectivization and famine, and Ukrainians who assimilated. Given
the data available at that time, he doubted that we could sort out
how much of this loss was attributable to each category.

My next encounter with the issues came in 1983. I was a Neporany Fellow
at CIUS, and my only obligation was to work on my book about Galician
villagers and the Ukrainian national movement in the 19th century.

I would spend every day poring over my sources and writing my
monograph. In the room next to me was another researcher, also working
on a book on the Ukrainian peasantry.

This was Alex Babyonyshev, better known under his pseudonym
Maksudov. He was a former human­rights activist in the USSR and
interested in demographic questions, history and politics. His book
was about collectivization and the famine.

Needless to say, two researchers with a basement to themselves and
working on related topics entered into intense discussions of their
projects.

For me, it was like a year­long seminar on how collectivization
was implemented and on how to arrive at a more accurate estimate of
the population losses. I learned that these estimates were much more
complex than even Janusz had taught me. Alex was busy drawing up graphs
of the age structure of populations, examining economic indicators
that might help estimate the extent of out­migration from Ukraine
in the 30s, and attacking the problem from other angles. He estimated
that the total demographic loss in Ukraine came to 4.5 million.

Later in the mid­1990s, I began to work on the Holocaust. My readings
in this field only reinforced the lessons I had learned earlier on the
difficulty of estimating the number of victims when mass murder was
involved. It was often helpful to scholars when a particular German
unit would report to Berlin that it had killed a number of Jews in
such and such locality, but generally the picture was fuzzy.

I bring all this up to help explain why I am disturbed by blithe
claims I see being made about 7 or 10 million Ukrainians killed in the
famine. I know that President Viktor Yushchenko and his administration
are also using the 10 million figure. That does not make it correct,
however.

President Yushchenko once relied on a professional historian,
Stanislav Kulchytskiy, for advice on historical issues, but now he
seems to have decided to use history as a political tool and does
not want to be confused by the facts.

In Ukraine, politicians frequently appeal to identity politics, since
symbols are easier to deliver than better health care, education,
or civil service.

Dr. Kulchytsky was among the ideological architects of Yushchenko’s
campaign to have the Ukrainian famine recognized internationally as
genocide. He devoted a number of publications in 2005 to explaining
why the famine fit the definition.

In the texts, Kulchytskiy stuck to the results of his earlier research
on the demographic effects of the famine in Ukraine: that there were
3,238,000 deaths directly attributable to the Holodomor.

Kulchytskiy had conducted careful research on the subject and
published several works devoted to the demography of the famine. What
distinguishes Kulchytskiy’s research from that of the earlier
researchers is that it draws on statistical information that was not
available before the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of
its archives.

Kulchytskiy also drew heavily on recent studies by Australian
historian and demographer Stephen Wheatcroft, who estimates that 3
to 3.5 million died in the Ukrainian famine.

Another serious attempt to estimate the losses in Ukraine was
conducted by a team of French and Ukrainian demographers (Jacques
Vallin, France Mesle, Serguei Adamets, and Serhii Pirozhkov). Here
is their conclusion:

"The disasters of the decade culminated in the horrific famine of
1933. These events resulted in a dramatic fall in fertility and a rise
in mortality. Our estimates suggest that total losses can be put at
4.6 million, 900,000 of which were due to forced migration, 1 million
to a deficit in births, and 2.6 million to exceptional mortality."

So how many people were killed by the famine? From 2.5 to 3.5
million. Those who died disproportionately were the rural population
(predominantly Ukrainians) and little children. May their memory
be eternal.

And let me add: may it be unsullied by falsehood.

I find it disrespectful to the dead that people use their deaths in
a ploy to gain the moral capital of victimhood. To this end, they
inflate the numbers. Let me just take one case.

Marta Tomkiw and Bobby Leigh are working on a film about the
famine. The trailer opens with the following: "The Darfur, Sudan
genocide claimed the lives of 180,000 people in four years. The
Armenian genocide claimed the lives of 1 million people from 1915
to 1918. The Holocaust claimed the lives of 6 million people in nine
years. They are not forgotten."

"Unfortunately, the Holodomor has exceeded these tragedies by claiming
the lives of 10 million Ukrainians in only 17 months. History knows
no other crime of such nature and magnitude."

Here I do not want to single out this particular movie project for
criticism. These are views one can easily find in many other Ukrainian
representations of the famine, particularly in the North American
diaspora. But the trailer formulates them clearly.

The point of these ideas is that the Holodomor is bigger than the
others, particularly bigger than the Holocaust. I do not understand
why others are not offended by this competition for victimhood, even
if the numbers were true, which they are not. I think the discussion
of tragedies like these demands a certain moral probity.

Disasters like these should not be taken lightly, manipulated,
instrumentalized, or falsified. Moreover, these are not simply deaths,
but crimes, murders, and violations of the moral order. How much more
careful we should be about them, how much more respectful of the truth.

Even if the Holodomor did account for 10 million victims, and even
if this competition were decent, the final claim about this being
the biggest crime in history would still be incorrect.

There was also a famine in China directly attributable to the campaign
for the Great Leap Forward. Again, it is difficult to estimate the
number of losses, but Western and Chinese scholars estimate that from
15 to 43 million peasants starved to death in China in 1959 to 61.

Here I have attempted to bridge that gap with information about the
number of deaths actually attributable to the Holodomor. But I am
also raising a moral question about how we should remember our dead.

I think it should be clear to all that the respect and honesty we owe
the departed means that we should refrain from using their deaths to
gain political popularity in Ukraine or to score points in interethnic
rivalry in North America. Above all, we must be careful not to embed
their deaths in a falsehood.

John­Paul Himka is professor of Ukrainian and Eastern European
history at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.

–Boundary_(ID_jiKKdUL0Kpc7OW0COWspFw)- –

‘HIZBULLAH’S DIGGING ITS OWN GRAVE’
By Brenda Gazzar

Jerusalem Post
10668639076&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowF ull
May 15 2008

Hizbullah is "digging its own grave" by having turned its weapons
against its own people in recent days, a Lebanese parliamentarian
told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

"I think Hizbullah proved that… it’s not a resistance [group],"
said Yeghia Djeredjian of the Social-Democrat Hunchag party, an
Armenian political party.

"It’s not a political party. It’s only a terrorist organization."

An Arab League delegation arrived in Beirut on Wednesday in an
emergency effort to defuse the crisis, which has killed at least 82
people across the country within the last week and has stoked fears
in the Mideast of a broader regional confrontation.

On Wednesday, Lebanon’s US-backed cabinet canceled two measured it
took against Hizbullah last week that sparked fighting in which the
Shi’ite Islamist group briefly took over parts of the Lebanese capital.

A Lebanese minister said the Cabinet has reversed measures against
Hizbullah that triggered the worst violence since the country’s
15-year civil war.

Hizbullah demanded that the government reverse decisions to sack an
airport security chief for alleged ties to the Shi’ite group and to
declare the militants’ private telephone network illegal.

Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah said the moves amounted to a
declaration of war and shortly after, he unleashed his fighters on
the streets of Beirut.

The clashes left 54 dead.

Information Minister Ghazi Aridi said the Cabinet revoked the decisions
"in view of the higher national interest."

Seconds after his announcement, celebratory gunfire erupted south of
Beirut, a Hizbullah stronghold.

Prior to the decision, Djeredjian strongly criticized its prospects,
saying it would be better for Prime Minister Fuad Saniora’s government
to resign rather than cancel the measures against Hizbullah.

No government, he said, should make any decision "under the power
of guns."

A second politician, however, said that revoking the decision to fire
Beirut’s airport security chief – who allegedly has ties to Hizbullah
– and outlawing the Islamic group’s communications network would be
the right thing to do if the government received guarantees by all
parties and the Arab world that security could be preserved.

In addition, Hizbullah and its allies must refrain from "paralyzing the
country" through its civil disobedience campaign, the politician said.

But if such guarantees can’t be made, he added, "that will make the
crisis very dangerous."

The politician warned that the Iranian-backed Hizbullah must set aside
its arms and engage in dialogue with the other Lebanese parties before
the crisis deteriorated into another civil war.

"I think it’s completely amazing that the resistance against Israel
that we support all together is using their arms against us,"
he said. "I don’t know why they are saying that we are part of the
Israeli program, that we are being bought by the US… We don’t have
arms. We just want a strong army. When you are talking about the
state and the government, it has to be for all Lebanon."

Djeredjian argued there was no reason for any group other than the
state to carry weapons unless there was an attack on the country.

"If Israel or any country attacks Lebanon, I am the first person to
carry a gun against that country," he said. "If there is no attack on
Lebanon, there is no reason to keep any gun outside the government’s
powers."

PRIORITY IN ARMENIAN FOREIGN POLICY: THE US OR IRAN?
By Hatem Cabbarli

Today’s Zaman
o?load=detay&link=141831&bolum=109
May 15 2008
Turkey

Due to the irredentist policy it has maintained since independence,
Armenia has had serious disagreements and problems with all its
neighbors except Iran; these problems are for the most part still
prevalent.

Armenia is currently unable to use the northern border for
transportation because it invaded part of Azerbaijan, and unable to use
the western border because it still insists upon refusing to recognize
Turkey’s territorial integrity, relying on the so-called Armenian
genocide discourse. Even though it seeks to resolve the problem in
relation to the northern border via transportation through Georgia,
at this point it is still unable to use the route effectively because
of current problems in the region. In this regard, its relations
with Iran become very important. Even if Armenia’s geopolitical
weakness determines the relations between the parties, there are
also important political factors at play. Iran has remained ignorant
vis-a-vis Armenia’s invasion of Azeri territories, despite the latter’s
predominantly Shiite population; it also extended support to Armenia in
relation to the southern Azerbaijan question. In the event of an Azeri
victory in this war, 30 million Azeri Turks in the region would have
been eager to become independent or seek integration with northern
Azerbaijan. Moreover, Iran has also sought to circumvent Turkey’s
influence in the region and undermine bilateral relations between
Turkey and Azerbaijan by maintaining good relations with Armenia. The
same goal was shared by Armenia in its policy vis-a-vis Turkey.

Rapprochement between Iran and Armenian has also been criticized
by the US because of its escalating tensions with Iran. Actually,
the US has never been so clear and determined in its opposition
to the good relations between Armenia and Iran. Even though the US
currently asks Turkey to limit its relations with Iran, its silence
in response to rapprochement between Iran and Armenia should be
noted. Is it because of the impact of lobbying activities by the
Armenian diaspora in the US? If so, this means that US national
interests are subject to the initiative of the Armenian lobbies —
which is irreconcilable with state dignity and seriousness. Is it
possible to speak of Christian/American solidarity in favor of Armenia,
which seeks to expand its territories in predominantly Muslim regions?

Even though Armenia has declared a strategic alliance with Russia,
the amount of aid granted it by the US is far greater than the aid
forwarded by Russia. Armenia receives the most American financial
aid after Israel; the US still grants large amounts of aid to this
country. In addition, the US views Nagorno-Karabakh as a separate
unit; based on this decision, the American administration transmitted
financial aid for the Karabakh Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh directly
instead of the Azeri administration.

The US does not act based on ethical considerations when it requests
permission to set up military bases in Azerbaijan, while it remains
silent vis-a-vis the improving bilateral relations between Armenia
and Iran. The US is not uneasy with the cooperation between Christian
Armenia and Muslim/Shiite Iran, while it is disgruntled by attempts
to maintain relations between Muslim countries, including Azerbaijan,
Iran and Turkey. It goes even further, requesting to set up bases in
Azerbaijan and relying on its military units stationed in Turkey in
its operations against Iran.

The US has intensified its pressure on Azerbaijan to secure approval
for a military base while it never considers making a similar request
of Armenia, which receives large sums of financial aids from the
American institutions every year and maintains good relations with
Russia and Iran. Armenia sometimes returns American requests despite
the large amount of financial aid. During the discussions as to whether
it was possible to station NATO troops in Armenia when a crisis had
erupted between the US and Iran in relation to the uranium enrichment,
Armenian Defense Minister Serj Sarkisyan underlined such a possibility
was out of question even in theoretical basis.

A new visa control procedure

Beginning Dec. 16, 2002, the US decided to apply the visa regime
envisaged for the citizens of states supporting and sponsoring
international terrorism to Armenian citizens as well. Armenia became
the 21st state (and the first Christian state) subjected to this
regime. The visa controls under this regime were made in relation to
all Armenian citizens over age 16 that live in or will later arrive in
the US. This decision, made after Sept. 11, has in general included
Muslim countries, including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Syria and
Pakistan. During the discussions over the introduction of this regime
and inclusion of Armenian citizens in its scope, David Shahnazaryan,
who served as the Armenian intelligence chief in the administration
of the first head of state, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, made a sensational
statement wherein he noted that Afghan terrorists entered the US
holding Armenian passports. Undoubtedly, this was the major reason
for the US to include Armenian citizens in the visa regime.

According to new reports by Armenian news agency Panarmenian and
others, the US administration lifted this tough via regime for
Armenian citizens following pressure from the Armenian government
and the Armenian diaspora effective, effective Dec. 18, 2002. The US
administration ceasing to apply this visa regime vis-a-vis Armenian
citizens only two days after its introduction reveals how important
and influential the Armenian diaspora is.

Parallel to these developments, the US has never pressured Armenia,
despite some Armenian corporations selling nuclear technology to
Iran. In response to improvements in bilateral economic relations,
Iran seeks to construct an oil refinery plant in Armenia. The US, which
expressed its displeasure and uneasiness with a natural gas agreement
between Iran and Turkey, has made no statement in relation this
project, which will obviously make Iran very influential in the region.

Finally, the US noticed Armenia’s true face. The US State Department
expressed its concerns over the frequent official visits held
between Armenia and Iran. Furthermore, the US described Armenia as
a terrorism-sponsoring state, adding that the country had a corrupt
banking system that contributed to money-laundering activities
to finance terrorist acts. Following this statement, Armenian
Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisyan unexpectedly pledged to improve
relations with Iran, further noting that the national security
council secretary would hold official visits to Iran to meet with
the Iranian president and other official figures. It is likely the US
will not remain silent this time as well vis-a-vis this development,
and act reasonably to pick its supporters and enemies. The US may
at least suspend financial aid for Armenia and extend the aid to
Nagorno-Karabakh through Azerbaijan. It may even consider repealing
section 907 supplemental to the Bill on Supporting Independence,
which prohibits financial aid to Azerbaijan.

The actions of the Armenian administration should demonstrate that
the country’s foreign policy priorities don’t rely on the US, which
supplies it with financial aid; its priorities instead include Russia,
which has almost colonized this country, and Iran, which uses Armenia
against Azerbaijan, instead of the US. The US should consider this
Armenian stance in its relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey and
consider also the strategic alliance between Russia and Armenia when
devising a policy vis-a-vis this country. At the very least, it should
base its policy vis-a-vis Turkey and Armenia on a more ethical ground.

* Hatem Cabbarlı is the deputy director at the Azerbaijani National
Assembly’s Analytical Information Department.

–Boundary_(ID_1PlanFYKJ60HiE1zkvJk0w )–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARGENTINA LOSING US OVER ‘GENOCIDE’ ROW, WARNS ANKARA
Emine Kart Ankara

Today’s Zaman
o?load=detay&link=141905&bolum=102
May 15 2008
Turkey

The Turkish capital’s patience seems to have been stretched to the
limit by Buenos Aires’ indifference to its strong uneasiness over
a cascade of laws, official decisions and statements in support of
claims of a systematic genocide campaign against Anatolian Armenians
in the beginning of the last century.

"Endorsing laws, decisions and statements concerning the so-called
Armenian genocide both at its federal and regional parliaments since
the 1970s, Argentina hasn’t given a thought at all to the reaction
it created in Turkey," a senior Turkish diplomat told Today’s Zaman
on Tuesday.

"The relations between Argentina — which hasn’t avoided mounting
the tension via adopting last year a law concerning April 24; this
year’s approval of the Senate of a declaration concerning this law
and statements made by senior level bureaucrats — and Turkey have
come to the point of rupture," the same diplomat, speaking under
customary condition of anonymity, also said, reflecting Ankara’s
anger over the issue.

In November 2006 the lower house of Argentina’s parliament adopted a
resolution recognizing the killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire
during World War I as genocide. The resolution, which was adopted
by an overwhelmingly majority in the assembly, declared April 24 an
official "day of mutual tolerance and respect" among peoples around
the world. Armenians mark April 24 as the beginning of a systematic
genocide campaign against Ottoman Armenians.

In January 2007, in a move that brought applause from the Armenian
diaspora, Argentina President Néstor Kirchner approved the draft
law proclaiming April 24 "the day of tolerance and respect."

Turkey categorically rejects the genocide claims and says Turks and
Armenians were killed in internal strife when Armenians revolted
against Ottoman rule in eastern Anatolia in hopes of carving out an
independent state in collaboration with the invading Russian military.

In April this year, Argentina’s Senate approved a declaration with
reference to the law, which entered into force in January 2007
following the president’s approval. In the same month, the Turkish
Foreign Ministry had announced that State Minister Mehmet Aydın
cancelled a planned visit to Argentina in protest of Argentina’s
stance.

Turkish officials exerted efforts for overcoming the languor in
bilateral relations with Argentina that emerged following January
2007, the diplomat explained, adding, however, that these efforts
went unanswered.

"The Argentinean government hasn’t put distance between itself and
this law and has even avoided making a statement that would emphasize
the importance attached to good relations with our country," the
diplomat said, portraying a move in April of this year as a sign
clearly showing incomprehension of the Argentinean Senate concerning
ongoing "tension and disappointment" in Turkey created by earlier
developments in Argentina.

It will not be a surprise if the Foreign Ministry announces that it
will call its ambassador in Buenos Aires for political consultations
as it did in January of last year.

"Under these conditions, continuing relations between the two
countries at the ambassadorial level is not compatible with political
realities. The crisis between the two countries will deepen further
as long as decisions and discourses belonging to Argentina — based on
Armenian lies distorting history and violating fundamental principles
of international law — continue," the Turkish diplomat said.

Argentinean ambassador summoned to Foreign Ministry

The Foreign Ministry recently summoned Argentinean Ambassador to Turkey
Brugo Marco to its headquarters, where Ambassador Ertugrul Apakan,
undersecretary of the ministry, submitted to Marco a diplomatic note of
protest expressing Turkey’s uneasiness over the series of developments.

"The policy that has been assumed by Argentina concerning the so-called
genocide is unacceptable. International relations are conducted
state-to-state, thus governments are also responsible for problems
created in bilateral relations by decisions made at parliaments,
which are indispensable parts of states," Apakan told Marco while
handing over the note.

The undersecretary of Argentina’s Justice Ministry attended a
demonstration in Buenos Aires last month to mark April 24. This
attendance and a series of accusatory statements against Turkey are
considered by Ankara "an attack to not only on Turkey’s history,
but also on the modern Turkish Republic."

"These facts also clearly showed us that anti-Turkey policy has gone
beyond the borders of the parliament and has been embraced by the
government as well. The hostile manner assumed insistently against
our country is an open evidence of the presence of a political dispute
between Argentina and Turkey — whatever its reason or justification
is," the same Turkish diplomat said.

–Boundary_(ID_qJXyvpKoLWoXcO6JV8RukA)–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress