Former Diplomat Arrested In Document Scam

FORMER DIPLOMAT ARRESTED IN DOCUMENT SCAM

July 30, 2009

Norair Ghalumian, a former Armenian Consul in Los Angeles, and four
other alleged suspects have been arrested for selling fake government
letters to Armenians facing deportation from the United States,
the A1plus news service reported on July 30.

US investigators say Ghalumian allegedly charged as much as $35,000 for
each letter, which purported to be issued in the name of the Armenian
government. The letters stated that candidates for deportation from
the United States would not be allowed back into Armenia.

Once presented with the letter, US immigration officials would release
the Armenian detainees. Ghalumian and his accused accomplices deny
the charges, according to A1plus. According to some reports, several
dozen such letters were issued to Armenians in the Untied States who
had been convicted of a felony and who were facing deportation.

Ghalumian was arrested in Los Angeles, home to the largest
Armenian population outside of Armenia, the Armtown news agency
reported. Ghalumian served as the consul in Los Angeles from 1999-2003.

http://www.eurasianet.org

ANKARA: The Ugly Truth About The Kurdish Question — The Armenian Qu

THE UGLY TRUTH ABOUT THE KURDISH QUESTION — THE ARMENIAN QUESTION!?
By Orhan Kemal Cenga°Z

Today’s Zaman
2-109-the-ugly-truth-about-the-kurdish-question-th e-armenian-question-by-orhan-kemal-cengiz.html
Jul y 31 2009
Turkey

If we could discuss the Armenian question openly, if we could confront
the Armenian tragedy, there would not have been a Kurdish question.

We are far from understanding the Armenian question, yet can we be
close to solving the Kurdish question?

To answer this, we need to look at how the Kurdish question emerged
in the first place. The same state "problem solving" mentality was in
work for both the Armenian and Kurdish questions. Population exchanges,
forceful evacuations and atrocities directed at civilians. Nothing
has changed over all these years. The same "problem solving" mentality
created the very problem it was trying to solve. The Kurdish question
was very simple to solve in the beginning. There was a marginal armed
group (the PKK, or Kurdistan Workers’ Party) which used to carry out
sporadic attacks against security forces. Most Kurds did not like
them. But many Kurds also wanted to be recognized as Kurds; be able to
preserve and live their culture, speak their language and so on. At
that time, the Turkish official stance — dictated by the military,
basically — was very rigid on the Kurdish question. According to this
"understanding," there were no Kurds, there was no separate Kurdish
language. Kurds were "mountain Turks." They were called "Kurds"
because of the sound they make when they walk on snow: "Kart," or
"Kurt." For those of you who do not know the difference between Kurdish
and Turkish, they are about as similar as Chinese and English. So
basically, the official understanding of the Kurdish question was a
joke. If we did not know the sufferings of Kurds as a result of this
"unwise" approach, we could even say that the Turkish state has a
dry sense of humor because of the creation of this "mountain Turk"
concept. But it was not a joke, and this understanding of the question
caused a serious human tragedy in Anatolia once again.

The treatment of Kurdish prisoners in the Diyarbakır prison after the
1980 military coup was a turning point. The torture and ill treatment
of Kurdish inmates in this prison was beyond human imagination. The
Diyarbakır prison was like a Nazi concentration camp. The inmates
suffered so much that upon release almost all of them went to the
mountains to join the ranks of the PKK. People were imprisoned even for
just expressing peaceful ideas about the Kurdish problem. It would not
be an exaggeration to say that the phenomenon of the Diyarbakır prison
created the PKK we know today. With these "angry" militants in its
ranks, the PKK increased the number of its attacks dramatically. The
Turkish security apparatus started to seek new ways to handle this
"new phenomenon" and (not surprisingly, of course) came up with the
idea of using more violence. They created the concept of "fighting
terrorists with their own methods." Kurdish villages were set on fire;
3,000 villages were destroyed. The monster created by the Turkish
deep state, JİTEM (an illegal gendarmerie unit), claimed more than
17,000 lives. People were abducted in broad daylight, and their dead
bodies later thrown onto streets, under bridges and into wells. No
person ever turned up alive after being taken by JITEM. The terror
they created, like the terror in the Diyarbakır prison, sent more
and more militants to the PKK.

Stuck between a rock and hard place

This is one side of the coin. On the other side, there is the PKK. It
was first established as a Marxist-Leninist organization and turned
into an extremely nationalist, violent structure. Many times, poor
Kurdish villagers were persecuted simultaneously by security forces
and the PKK, both of which accused villagers of aiding and abetting
"the other" one. The PKK killed many Kurds. The PKK tortured and
killed its own militants. The PKK used terrorist attacks, including
suicide bombings, exploding bombs in the most crowded streets, and so
on. The PKK was ruled by an iron fist. To be honest, for many years
I thought the worst thing that could ever happen to the Kurds would
be to live under the authority of the PKK, which has the potential
of becoming one of the worst dictatorships the world has ever seen.

Today we are at a point where Turkish state officers mention the
"Kurdish question" openly, and both the PKK and the Turkish state are
about to explain their "road maps" for a solution to the problem. In
the past, there were occasions when we all felt so close to the
solution. Each time, the "Turkish deep state" and the "deep PKK"
found a way to sabotage the whole process. Today, because of the
Ergenekon case, we are in a more advantageous situation. At least one
"party" has fewer options to sabotage the "process." But what is this
process? Does it include an open confrontation with our past? Does
it include both Turks and Kurds questioning taboos? Will it lead us
to confront older and deeper wounds in our past, like the Armenian
tragedy, which was created by Turks and Kurds together?

My observation is that no one in Turkey is ready for this kind of
confrontation. Instead, everyone waits for "the other" to accept their
responsibility without sacrificing anything. I strongly believe that
if we do not confront this ugly past, if we do not open our hearts
to the human suffering, no "solution" will be long lasting. If
Kurds do not open their hearts to PKK members who were tortured
and killed by the PKK or the Turkish victims of terror created by
this organization, likewise if Turks fail to understand the pain and
suffering of Kurdish villagers who were wrested from their very roots,
we cannot solve anything. This is the first level. At the second
level, we need a deeper understanding. Both Turks and Kurds need to
confront the Armenian tragedy, which they created together. If Kurds
start to understand this tragedy, they will get rid of the illusion
that they are the only people who ever suffered in Anatolia. If they
understand the Armenian tragedy, and how Kurds were used by the deep
state then, they would be much more humble, much less nationalist. We
need to question many things. Every answer will lead to other
questions. This is a process full of pain. Is anyone ready for that
much deep questioning? I don’t think so. Unless we engage this kind of
questioning, we will inevitably end up with shallow "solutions" which
will not be long lasting. If we had understood the Armenian tragedy,
we would not have become mired in the Kurdish question. Unless we
question our past, some people will try to restore the "deep state"
once again, some people will try to re-establish the PKK sometime in
the future. Everything depends on severing the moral bases of these
terrible structures, and this depends on an open confrontation with
everything in the past. Can we start?

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-18252

Matthew Bryza: Armenia-Turkey Rapprochement Blocked

MATTHEW BRYZA: ARMENIA-TURKEY RAPPROCHEMENT BLOCKED

Today.Az
s/54266.html
July 30 2009
Azerbaijan

OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair Matthew Bryza expressed regret on
slow progress in Armenia-Turkey relations normalization due to
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.

"Unfortunately, normalization of Armenia-Turkey relations that we
all have recently witnessed is currently blocked,"he stated.

http://www.today.az/news/politic

BAKU: Turkey Wants Armenia To Show Determination

TURKEY WANTS ARMENIA TO SHOW DETERMINATION

Today.Az
olitics/54235.html
July 30 2009
Azerbaijan

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Wednesday that Turkish
government was still resolute to normalize relations with neighboring
Armenia, Turk.net reported.

"But at the same time, it is important for us to see the same
determination from the international community and especially from
Armenia on the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan," Davutoglu
told a press conference after his meeting with Bosnian Foreign Minister
Sven Alkalaj.

"We believe that the most extensive normalization would be seen in
our region in the coming period," Davutoglu said.

http://www.today.az/news/p

Armenia Sets Conditions For His Visiting Turkey

ARMENIA SETS CONDITIONS FOR HIS VISITING TURKEY

Interfax
July 29 2009
Russia

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan said on Tuesday that he would accept
an invitation from his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gul, to attend a
soccer match in Turkey in October "only on condition of open borders
[between Armenia and Turkey] or if we are on the threshold of lifting
the blockade of Armenia."

Sargsyan was speaking at a news conference in Yerevan.

In September last year, Gul visited Armenia at Sargsyan’s invitation
to attend a soccer match between the Armenian and Turkish national
teams. The two teams are due to meet again in October, this time in
Turkey. Gul has invited Sargsyan to the match.

"Under the current circumstances, the Armenian side expects
constructive moves to provide an appropriate atmosphere for the visit,"
Sargsyan told Tuesday’s news conference.

Sargsyan also insisted that any conflict must be settled by diplomatic
means.

"We are sure that there are no universal methods of conflict
settlement. Every conflict has its own history and its own process. It
is impossible to find a just and stable solution without taking this
into account," he said.
From: Baghdasarian

BAKU: UN 64th General Assembly To Debate Nagorno-Karabakh

UN 64TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO DEBATE NAGORNO-KARABAKH

Trend
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

The United Nations General Assembly’s upcoming 64th session is going
to have two Nagorno-Karabakh conflict related issues, Trend News was
told at the Information center of the UN Headquarters, New-York. Those
are the resolution projects named "Protracted conflicts in the
GUAM area and their implications for international peace, security
and development" and "The situation in the occupied territories of
Azerbaijan", the centre said.

According to the UN HQ information office, these items have not yet
been considered by the General Assembly at its 63rd session, and remain
on the agenda of that session. Their inclusion in the provisional
agenda of the 64th session is subject to any action the Assembly may
take on it at its 63rd session. The HQ information office notices,
that the exact time when these resolution projects are to be discussed
during the GA session, will be specified in the end of September.

A New York based "Mediators beyond borders" organization’s analyst
Tom Fiutak told Trend News that the role of the UN mechanisms in
the process of solving frozen conflict in South Caucasus, including
Nagorno-Karabakh, "provide a legitimate arena in which to address
them". He believes that "The question is not how much role the UN
should play in solving those conflicts, but when".

"Confronting "frozen" or locked conflicts has more to do with
understanding the dynamics of parties while judging correctly the
ability of the arena to contain the emotional, psychological, and
political results of the interaction of the conflicting parties. Every
action will cause a reaction," the analyst adds.

He also says that "There is always a danger of prematurely entering
into the conflict when the chances of a supportive and positive
outcome are very low". According to Mr. Fiutak, forecasting the
dynamics of such a complex conflict as for example Nagorno-Karabakh,
"takes a larger view than often either or all the parties possess. The
UN therefore, needs to sustain a presence and legitimacy so that
at the appropriate time, their intervention will have the greatest
chance of a positive and durable result".

Speaking on why the conflicts in South Caucasus area remain frozen, the
expert adds, that "Things are frozen because there is some advantage
to the parties to keep things frozen. The final judgment to intervene
or not to intervene must be based on one’s belief that the process
of thawing and the resulting "unfrozen" state is more desirable than
the current condition".

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian armed
forces have occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan since 1992, including
the Nagorno-Karabakh region and 7 surrounding districts. Azerbaijan
and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994. The co-chairs of
the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia, France, and the U.S. – are currently
holding the peace negotiations.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BAKU: Azerbaijan To Continue Talks In Line With Madrid Principles, I

AZERBAIJAN TO CONTINUE TALKS IN LINE WITH MADRID PRINCIPLES, IF ITS UPGRADED VERSION MEETS NATIONAL INTERESTS: RULING PARTY

Trend
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan will continue talks in line with the Madrid principles
on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict resolution, if its upgraded version
meets the country’s national interests, the governing New Azerbaijan
Party (NAP) said.

"As the upgraded version of the Madrid principles has not been yet
publicized, it is too difficult to comment on it. But if this version
meets Azerbaijan’s national interests, the country will continue
the talks in line with these principles," the NAP Deputy Executive
Secretary Mubariz Gurbanli told the party’s official Web site on
July 29.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan
lost all of Nagorno-Karabakh except for Shusha and Khojali in December
1991. In 1992-93, Armenian armed forces occupied Shusha, Khojali and 7
districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan and Armenia signed
a ceasefire in 1994. The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia,
France, and the U.S. – are currently holding the peace negotiations.

Gurbanli said if the upgraded version does not meet national interests,
Azerbaijan can offer to develop new principles and hold talks on
line with it. "Azerbaijan will not give up its basic position. The
Azerbaijani president said the conflict must be solved as part of
our country’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. In this regard,
all solution versions must base on these factors," the NAP deputy
executive secretary said.

BAKU: Azerbaijani Political Scientists Assess UN Discussions On Nago

AZERBAIJANI POLITICAL SCIENTISTS ASSESS UN DISCUSSIONS ON NAGORNO-KARABAKH AS CONTINUATION OF DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE ON ARMENIA

Trend
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijani political scientists consider the discussion of two
issues on the Nagorno-Karabakh at the 64th UN General Assembly as a
continuation of the diplomatic pressure on Armenia.

"Discussions will be useful as a means of exerting pressure on
Armenia. After the recent discussions at the UN on the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, Armenia’s mood is not the same. It felt isolated," Political
Scientist, Rasim Musabayov told Trend News on July 29.

The political scientist believes continuation of the diplomatic
pressure on Armenia is too important for Azerbaijan. "Although the UN
resolutions will not make Armenia liberate the occupied territories,
it should ways feel such a pressure," Musabayov said.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan
lost all of Nagorno-Karabakh except for Shusha and Khojali in December
1991. In 1992-93, Armenian armed forces occupied Shusha, Khojali and 7
districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan and Armenia signed
a ceasefire in 1994. The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia,
France, and the U.S. – are currently holding the peace negotiations.

The 64th UN General Assembly will debate two issues on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, UN HQ in New York told Trend News.

Political Scientist Zardusht Alizadeh considers discussions on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict at the UN General Assembly as a positive
phenomenon.

"But discussions are not enough to solve the problem. The discussions
must be accompanied by effective measures to establish the army,
peaceful diplomacy and effective information war. These measures
should be implemented in its entirety. The most important of these is
to continue to build a democratic society in Azerbaijan, capable to
solve problems of all citizens," Alizadeh told Trend News on July 29.

He said the steps taken towards the restoration of Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan yield positive fruits. "If the
problem cannot be solved by means of pressure, at least it is not
forgotten by acquiring new topicality in the society. Aggressor-Armenia
always feels Azerbaijan’s activity on the diplomatic front," said
Alizadeh.

Regarding non-fulfillment of four UN resolutions on the conflict,
the political scientist said the power is necessary to implement the
provisions of those resolutions. "Without force, these resolutions
are only political in nature. Their implementation is not obligatory,"
Alizadeh said.

Political Scientist, Vafa Guluzadeh does not expect progress after
the UN discussions on the Nagorno-Karabakh to resolve the issue. "The
UN four resolutions on this issue remain on paper. Even after the
discussions, UN takes any decision, none of steps will be taken to
implement it," Guluzadeh told Trend News on July 29.

He believes Armenia is a Russian "province" and does not exist as
the state. "As the UN fears Russia, it does not pass decisions on
this country. Therefore, we should wait," the political analyst said.

BAKU: Turkey Reaffirms Determination To Normalize Relations With Arm

TURKEY REAFFIRMS DETERMINATION TO NORMALIZE RELATIONS WITH ARMENIA

Trend
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Wednesday that Turkish
government was still resolute to normalize relations with neighboring
Armenia, Turk.net reported.

"But at the same time, it is important for us to see the same
determination from the international community and especially from
Armenia on the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan," Davutoglu
told a press conference after his meeting with Bosnian Foreign Minister
Sven Alkalaj.

Turkey and Armenia have no diplomatic or economic relations since
Armenia declared its independence in 1991 and Turkey closed its border
with Armenia after this country invaded the Upper-Karabakh region of
Azerbaijan in 1992.

On July 24, 2008, the then Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan
expressed Turkey’s willingness to normalize relations with Yerevan.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul travelled to Armenia in September
2008 to watch 2010 FIFA World Cup qualifier match between the two
countries upon an invitation by President Serzh Sarksyan of Armenia.

Turkey and Armenia are to play another qualifier in Istanbul in
September 2009 but Sarksyan said Tuesday he would only accept an
invitation to the return match if Turkey takes "real steps" to open
their border.

Davutoglu said Turkish government was hopeful over the normalization
process with Armenia.

"We believe that the most extensive normalization would be seen in
our region in the coming period," Davutoglu said.

BAKU: Azeri Court Drops Charges Against Translator Of Hitler’s "Mein

AZERI COURT DROPS CHARGES AGAINST TRANSLATOR OF HITLER’S "MEIN KAMPF"

APA
July 29 2009
Azerbaijan

A court in Azerbaijan has dropped charges against an editor who
translated Hitler’s "Mein Kampf" into the Azerbaijani language and
published it in his newspaper, APA news agency said on 29 July.

Baku’s Narimanov district court dropped charges of "provoking national,
racial, social or religious hatred and hostility" against the editor
of Xural newspaper, Avaz Zeynalli.

Criminal proceedings against Zeynalli were launched after the leader
of the community of mountain Jews in Azerbaijan, Semyon Ixiilov,
appealed to the country’s president over the publication.

"This is a very important decision," APA quoted Zeynalli as
saying. "This decision is a proof of the independence of Azerbaijani
courts. Finally, the process that started on 4 December 2004 has
ended and readers have regained the right to read books in their
native language."

Zeynalli also said that he was translating Russian politician
Vladimir Zhirinovskiy’s "Last strike on south" and Armenian writer
Zori Balayan’s "Fire" and planning to publish them, APA said.