Author: admin

Moscow News (Russia)
November 10, 2004

NINOO BURDZHANADZE CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC ON PROSPECTS FOR
GEORGIAN-RUSSIAN RELATIONS

By Yury Vasilyev The Moscow News

On an official visit to Moscow, Georgian Parliament Speaker Nino
Burdzhanadze offered Russia friendship – but only on certain terms

Russian-Georgian relations have seen a breakthrough – of sorts. Nino
Burdzhanadze, speaker of the Georgian parliament, finally made it to
Moscow. The on again, off again dialogue between Moscow and Tbilisi
has been dragging on for many months; according to the Georgian side,
this is through no fault of its own. Talks have oficially resumed,
but this does not make either side particularly happy.

“What is going on in Russian-Georgian relations oftentimes does not
fit into the bounds of international law,” says Nino Burdzhanadze,
who holds a degree in international law from the Moscow State
University. “But I believe that sooner or later we will manage to
bring these relations back to normal. It would be preferable if this
happened sooner rather than later, of course.”

Why has the relationship not worked out?

I dare say that I have more complaints to make against Russia than
against Georgia. Although of course I can also see shortfalls on our
side. Over the past 10 years our relations have been steadily
deteriorating to the point where it is very difficult to turn the
situation around even if we try. Yet if there is no will…

Not so long ago our relations were discussed at the PACE. On the
Georgian side there was Speaker Burdzhanadze, while the Russian side
was represented by Konstantin Kosachev, head of the RF State Duma
Foreign Relations Committee. Were you not irked by this disparity in
status?

Not at all. I am quite happy dealing with Mr. Kosachev. He is an
intelligent person who has a good understanding of this set of
problems. My main purpose at the time was not to challenge our
Russian counterparts to a duel, to stir debate, but only to inform
our European colleagues about the outstanding problems in
Russian-Georgian relations.

Did Russia pointedly refuse to participate in a two-way discussion?

Not exactly. It was simply that in response to all of our proposals
for a meeting we received discreet indications to the effect that “it
would be better to put off your visit.” But then after Strasbourg, as
you can see, I got an opportunity to come to Moscow, and I very much
hope that Mr. Gryzlov (speaker of the RF State Duma. – Ed.) will soon
visit Tbilisi. In Moscow we had a productive discussion on all
issues, and not only with him.

Specifically what issues?

The most sensitive ones, at least as far as we are concerned. Very
often, despite all of President Putin’s statements about Russia’s
respect for Georgia’s territorial integrity, this is not what we are
seeing in reality. For example, a railway link has been reopened
between Sukhumi (the capital of Abkhazia. – Ed.) and Moscow, but the
Russian side did not bother to coordinate the move with Tbilisi. They
did not even deign to inform us.

In other words, it would have been enough if Moscow duly notified
you?

It would certainly not have been enough, but at least that would have
been civil. But when you are not even asked whether trains may cross
your state borders – moreover, they tried to pull a fast one on us
(the rail link was purportedly reopened by some commercial
structures) – it is very difficult to talk. I realize that each side
has its own interests to look after. But when I am told here that
“the residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are socially
disadvantaged and so we granted them RF citizenship,” I think of the
300,000 Georgian refugees from Abkhazia whose situation is just as
bad, yet they cannot even go to their motherland to visit the graves
of their parents or children.

Do you realize that the citizenship situation is practically
irreversible?

But it was granted unlawfully.

The procedure falls within the jurisdiction of the Russian
authorities. They may grant or refuse citizenship at their
discretion.

That’s just how it was done…

A new generation is growing up in Russia that does not see Georgia as
a friend but, rather, as an enemy. We are witnessing a similar
pattern among the Georgian youth with regard to Russia. After the
horrible tragedy in Beslan – when we empathized with you- Georgia
received yet another slap on the face from Moscow: Foreign Minister
Lavrov all but put the blame for Beslan on Georgia. True, later the
situation was rectified, but it hurts all the same. And that was the
time when the railway line to Sukhumi was reopened. The victims of
Beslan had not as yet been buried, but a brass band was playing in
the Abkhaz capital with people celebrating the departure of the first
train to Moscow. Over the past 10 years, more than 1,500 civilians
have been killed and some 6,000 houses burned in Abkhazia’s
ethnic-Georgian district of Gali. Against this backdrop, I am told in
the course of negotiations in Moscow: “Admit that the Chechens are
terrorists but the Abkhaz are not.” Well, yes, if you think of bomb
attacks on residential buildings and the seizure of a school, you
might agree with this. But then the relatives of those killed in the
Gali district have their own vision of such things.

I feel extremely uncomfortable with the fact that I have to assure
some people in Moscow that we really sympathized with Russia and that
I even have to provide evidence of this sympathy. But look at our
relations with the United States: America always stood by us, coming
through whenever Georgia needed support and even direct assistance,
and it demanded nothing in return for that.

Here is just one example. The return of the Meskhetian Turks to their
native land in Georgia was one precondition for Georgia’s
participation in Coun-cil of Europe (CE) structures. The Americans,
however, made an unprecedented move by relocating thousands of ethnic
Turks living in Krasnodar Krai to the United States and granting them
residence permits. Thus the “CE problem” was taken care of. How is
the Kremlin supposed to react to this?

You oversimplify the situation. But even if everything is the way you
say it is, is this bad? Yes, we have obligations to the Meskhetian
Turks. But, first, the deadline is 2014. Second, we have never
refused to help the repatriation of these people. Yet today ethnic
Armenians live in this area. Returning the Turks there means
provoking a massacre. Third, if Russia wants to be on friendly terms
with us, it should realize that with 300,000 refugees from Abkhazia,
Georgia is not in a position to admit thousands of Meskhetian Turks
in addition to this. So what’s wrong about America’s desire to help
our people?

Nothing’s wrong. The only question is how America’s political
interest in Georgia – which comes through not only in the Meskhetian
problem – is going to turn out for Russia.

Let’s face it: This is not a case of getting something for nothing.
But the United States is helping us build a normal democratic state,
not creating more problems for us. What stops you, for instance, from
facilitating the course of democracy in Georgia? But no, many people
in Russia want to see it as a divided country, easily controlled by
Moscow. So who would you make friends with if you were in our shoes?
Nonetheless, I would like to stress once again: We still want to be
friendly with Russia.

Do you see a way out of the Abkhaz conundrum?

Believe me, the Abkhaz people will realize sooner or later that it is
better to live in peace with Georgia – just as we had lived for
hundreds of years until the Russian empire moved into Abkhazia. What
happened in the presidential election (a pro-Russian candidate,
Khadzhimba, failed to win. – Ed.) is a slap in the face for the
Russian authorities. They were sure that they could control
everything in this land, but the people of Abkhazia showed that this
is not quite so. Thank God for this: At last, they understood what is
good for the Abkhaz people. At times the situation becomes simply
ridiculous: On the one hand, the Abkhaz authorities show us that they
are fighting for independence and international recognition. On the
other, they ask the State Duma to admit Abkhazia to the Russian
Federation. This also holds true for South Ossetia: Separatist
leaders talk about sovereignty, but a point of entry to Tskhinvali
(the capital of South Ossetia. – Ed.) is adorned with a huge picture
of V.V. Putin bearing the inscription “Putin – Our President.” I
greatly respect him, but independence and “Putin Our President” are
things that do not go very well together.

Nevertheless, Georgia declares its readiness to open its
privatization market to Russian business. What are you going to give
and what do you demand in return?

We are not giving anything just like that – this is a matter of
negotiations. We invited Russian businessmen, indicating that we
would be happy to see investment capital. Georgia is ready to open
itself up to economic cooperation, but on a mutually beneficial
basis. We must be sure that Russia’s presence in the Georgian economy
will not work against our national interests.

Are you happy with the RAO UES Unified Energy System’s presence in
the energy sector?

Mr. Chubais keeps his promises, in particular the promise to supply
power to Georgia. If the relations between our two countries are
built on such a pragmatic and constructive foundation, I am confident
that we will be able to avoid many problems.MN

FACT BOX

Burdzhanadze, Nino Anzorovna, was born on July 16, 1964; in 1981,
finished A. Tsereteli Secondary School #2 in the city of Kutaisi with
a gold medal, entering the Tbilisi I. Dzhavakhishvili University
School of Law in the same year; in 1986, she was admitted to the
graduate school at the Moscow State University (MGU) International
Law Department, in 1990 defending a Cand.Sc. dissertation, titled
Problems of International Organizations and International Maritime
Law; from 1991, associate professor at the Tbilisi University
International Law and International Relations Department; author of
approximately 20 academic papers, published in Georgian, Russian, and
English; since 1995, an elected member of the Georgian parliament;
from 1998, chairperson of the parliamentary Committee on
Constitutional and Legal Affairs and Law Enforcement; from 2000, head
of the parliamentary Foreign Relations Committee.

In November 2001, Nino Burdzhanadze was elected speaker of the
Georgian parliament. On November 22, 2003, following Eduard
Shevardnadze’s resignation, she was acting president, running the
country until a new head of state was elected (January 26, 2004),
thereupon resuming her functions as speaker of parliament.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Russian envoy advises Armenia to prioritize national interests

Mediamax news agency
10 Nov 04

Yerevan, 10 November: The ambassador of the Russian Federation to
Armenia, Anatoliy Dryukov, considers that “the level of relations
reached between Armenia and Russia can be described as very high”.

Anatoliy Dryukov voiced this opinion today at a meeting with professors
and teachers of Yerevan’s Grachya Acharyan University.

Commenting on the presence of pro-Western and pro-Russian moods in
Armenia, the Russian ambassador said that “if Armenia prioritizes its
national interests, then the vector of relations will remain correct”.

At present, Armenia and Russia are facing the task of maintaining
and expanding relations that have shaped between the countries for
centuries, Dryukov said. He said that several negative points in
bilateral relations “are of no significance” and “are temporary
in nature”.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SANA, Syrian Arab News Agency
Nov 9 2004

Archbishop / Fast Breaking Banquet

Aleppo, Nov.9 (SANA)

The Archbishop of the Armenian-Orthodox in Aleppo Shahan Sarkisian
held on Tuesday an Eftar ( fast breaking ) banquet celebrating the
Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

Governor of Aleppo Ossama Adi said that the banquet is an example of
the religious tolerance among Syrian citizens with all different
sects, adding that Syria is a home of the religious tolerance and
coexistence.

Mufti of Aleppo Dr. Ahmad Hassoun and the Archbishop Sarkisian also
stressed that Aleppo was and is still, throughout history, an example
of tolerance among all heavenly messages.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKISH PRESS TO PERSIST IN SHUFFLING ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Azg/arm
11 Nov 04

Armenian budget project of 2005 became a hot subject for Turkish and
Azeri printed media that keeps on confusing the world community by
stating that Armenia is removing the Armenian genocide issue from
its foreign policy agenda.

Sticking to their methods of disorientation Turkish newspapers do
not even shrink from mentioning names of Diaspora Armenians.

November 9 issue of Aksham presents Gyuler Qyumurjuâ~@~Ys article
titled “Making Better Relations with Armeniaâ~@¦”. The author
writes about “Islam and West”, a scientific conference organized
by Israelâ~@~Ys Jewish University in Nice, France, on November
6-7. Former state minister of Turkey Kemal Dervish was also to
participate at the conference. “Starting with the former leader of
Mossad and ending with Washingtonâ~@~Ys know-all Richard Pearl were
present there”, article reads.

Dervish changed his mind about participating at the conference at
the last moment. Author goes on telling about his meeting with
Alexy Gyovdjian and Samson Ozararat at the conference. Before
mentioning of the meeting Qyumurju writes about “historic step
taken in difficult relations with Armenia” and then adds: “After the
adherent of mild policy, Ter-Petrosian, President Robert Kocharian,
though maintaining tight relations with National Revolutionary Party
and Armenian organizations and lobbies of the world, took a positive
step towards Turkey. Armeniaâ~@~Ys state budget bill of 2005 already
taken to the parliament did not assign money for promoting genocide
acknowledgement as opposed to previous years. Only few weeks back
Armenian authorities stated that genocide acknowledgement is not a
precondition for improving relations with Turkey”.

The second part of the article dwelling on Gyovdjian and Ozararat
reads: “While the Armenian government excludes genocide recognition
from priority list depriving it of money in 2005 budget, Armenian
lobbyists in France were putting on clothing of radicalism.

I talked to Alexy Gyovdjian (he was our citizen, comes from Istanbul
where he lived till 18-years-old) who led French-Armenians in their
hanker after recognition of April 24. Despite this fact, his comments
on Yerevanâ~@~Ys mild policy were approving.

Mr. Gyovdjian was also present at our talk with Samson Ozararat. In
90s he had meetings with Alparsan Tyurkesh, late president of National
Movement Party, within the frameworks of meetings directed to settle
Armenia and Turkey-related issues. The name of Mr. Samson is well-known
to those occupying high posts in State Planning Organization and
Sabaja Group. Ozararat firmly stands for Tyurkeshâ~@~Ys position
of â~@~Xovercoming genocide claims and beginning trade cooperation
between the two statesâ~@~Y and is willing that Turkey begins
diplomatic relations with Armenia. Right at that moment Gyovdjian
noted that he joins Ozararat for the sake of constructive policy and
is even ready to participate in the initiatives taken by Turkeyâ~@~Ys
organizations of civil society.

Back in Ankara the â~@~Xexpertâ~@~Y in the issue told me that we
are waiting for a positive response. Why are we slow in adjusting
Tyurkeshâ~@~Ys ideas to the present-day conditions and in modernizing
our approaches? Perhaps everything will become clear after 17 of
December”.

By Hakob Chakrian

–Boundary_(ID_UK1drQI2yDVrLkmPmossRw)–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SAMVEL MKRTCHIAN: OUR COOPERATION WITH NATO IS A KEY COMPONENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY

Azg/arm
11 Nov 04

NATO Secretary General was in Yerevan last week within the frameworks
of his regional visit. At the press conference followed after his
meeting with President Kocharian, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer mentioned
about Armenia-NATO cooperation within Individual Partnership Action
Plan. What kind of Plan is this and where did Yerevan-Brussels
relations reach? Armenian ambassador to NATO Samvel Mkrtchian answers
those questions in an interview to Azg Daily.

– Cooperation with international structures generally starts
with applying the so-called principle of “cover approach” when an
institution carries out similarly policy for all the states of a
region. At a certain stage of cooperation the institution needs to
specify the frames and contents of cooperation. Certainly, not all
countries agree on the terms and demands of some programs. And NATO
has collaborated a new program for cooperation and partnership which
is called Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP). Now every state
engaged in Cooperation for Peace initiative within the frameworks
of IPAP may draw forward its suggestions. That means that a state
sets its priorities, evaluates its abilities and according to them
creates its own work program. If the opposite sides approves of the
program it may be put into action. We think of preparing the scheme
of our program by the end of this year and present it to NATO, after
which it will get approved and will be implemented.

РMr. Mkrtchian, Armenia̢~@~Ys accession to NATO is viewed as very
probable in near future, especially after Secretary Generaâ~@~Ys
visit. Is that possible that Armenia will some day declare, like
neighboring Azerbaijan and Georgia, of its desire to join NATO?

– In our political statements we were always clear and realistic,
as opposed to others, and now we declare that NATO membership is not
on our political agenda now. We hew to the chosen line in developing
our relations with NATO. How far will our relations reach â~@~S
is another issue. But we do not consider NATO membership a priority
so far because we are realistic about geopolitical issues that our
region is facing. We also take into consideration our readiness and
Organizationâ~@~Ys willingness to see us as a member. Today NATO
also is not hankering for Armeniaâ~@~Ys membership.

РDo you mean Armenia is not meeting NATO̢~@~Ys standards today? Is
that the reason why Armenia does not speak out about joining NATO?

РNo, that is not what I mean. It̢~@~Ys a very subtle issue. Our
cooperation with NATO is a key component for national security but
here we also have Russia and Organization of Joint Safety Treaty
supporting us, as well as separate states such as USA with which we
cooperate in the sphere of defense.

РAs an ambassador you are going to represent Armenia̢~@~Ys interests
in Brussels. What are the aims Armenia pursuits in NATO?

– NATO is a multifaceted organization. Today Armenia and NATO cooperate
in the sphere of extreme situation controlling. We also develop our
relations in the sphere of science. NATO implements two very important
projects in our region. First one is researching rivers of the region,
and Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia will watch that the rivers are
not polluted. Second one is the project of virtual silk way through
which the 3 states will gain access to the Internet. Another primary
issue is secure regions safety by the help of NATO. The Organization
itself declares about this function and that becomes a precondition
for future development and prosperity. Development and deepening of
our cooperation will largely depend on the success of IPAP.

– NATO high officials are speaking well of Armenia lately. What is
the reason of NATOâ~@~Ys optimism?

РNATO representatives evaluate Armenia̢~@~Ys abilities and accuracy
very highly. Frankly speaking, NATO is interested in developing
relations with us as our cooperation is rather easy-going. Certainly,
there are limits to our abilities coming from general situation in
the region, including unsettled Karabakh conflict, that keep us back
fro taking additional steps. But our cooperation within the frameworks
of the possible is efficient and that attracts the opposite side.

By Tatoul Hakobian

–Boundary_(ID_b3+XNXQVxLCoqVUVRSGxdA)–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Nov 10 2004

NATO PA May Recognize Armenia As Aggressor

Armenia may be recognized as an aggressor at the 50th session of
the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (PA) to be held in Venice, Italy on
November 12-16, the Milli Majlis (parliament) Vice Speaker Ziyafat
Asgarov said.

German parliamentarian, member of a NATO committee will deliver a
special report on Azerbaijan at the session. The report says that
Armenia has occupied Azerbaijan’s Nagorno Karabakh region and seven
adjacent districts, Asgarov underlined.

According to the Vice Speaker, the NATO PA may adopt, for the first
time in its history, a decision recognizing Armenia as aggressor.

The session participants will discuss issues related to the restoration
and development of Afghanistan and Iraq, fighting terrorism, new
partnership, the threat of weapons of mass destruction and cooperation
between NATO and the European Union.

Twenty-six NATO member states and thirteen PA associate member
countries will attend the session.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AzerTag, Azerbaijan State Info Agency
Nov 9 2004

SUMMARY MEETING ON ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS
PROMOTION HELD
[November 09, 2004, 15:43:06]

A seminal dealing the results of the TACIS regional project
“Ecological Information, and Public Awareness Promotion” took lace at
the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources. The project 2,5 mln
Euro has been implemented during 2 years in 6 CIS countries –
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine by Dutch
company Royal Haskoning and Regional ecological Center for Central
and Eastern European countries with headquarters in Kiev and will be
finished in December 2004.

Head of the project Veronica Vann advised that officials, NGOs and
the public were provided assistance to implement the regulations of
the Orhus Convention.

In all the countries involved, the project resulted in forming of
national groups, developing regional training and information
packages, holding training courses, implementing pilot projects on
the national and local level etc.

Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources Huseyngulu Baghirov noted
that the Ministry is planning to open 10 regional information centers
to be provided with comprehensive and detailed information on Orhus
Convention and other ecological documents.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ANOTHER OCCASION TO RECALL HEROISM

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
09 Nov 04

The public organization “Association of Parents of Killed Servicemen”
has been operating for 10 years already. Indeed it would be better
not to have such an association but death is inevitable at war. The
victory in the liberation war in Artsakh was obtained at the expense
of lives of the best sons of the motherland. The Association of the
Parents of Killed Servicemen established 10 years ago intended to
bring together the people who share their sorrow, to support them,
solve their social problems and, what is more important, keep alight
the memory of the brave men who sacrificed their lives for liberty. On
November 4, the tenth anniversary of creation of the organization a
solemn meeting was held at the Home of Officers in which were present
NKR president Arkady Ghukassian, prime minister Anoushavan Danielian,
members of the National Assembly, members of the government, army
servicemen, guests from Armenia.

LAURA GRIGORIAN.
09-11-2004

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Paradise Post, CA
Nov 9 2004

‘New’ Turkey, mostly Asian, eyes Europe

By Lowell Blankfort

Statues of Kemal Ataturk, hero of Turkeys resurgence after the post
World War I loss of its vast Ottoman Empire, adorn every Turkish city
and town. As dictator for 15 years, he undercut the power of Islam,
founded modern secular Turkey. This statute is in Istanbul.

OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS SECTION
11/9/2004
– In Texas, Bright Lights, Small City
– A Troubadour Pays Homage
– Lawyers delay Sanford trial
– On a mission to trace California’s past
– Book Family Farm
– With love from Germany
– With love from Germany

The Middle East’s largest country and straddling both Europe and
Asia, crucial U.S. ally Turkey is undergoing big changes. Lowell
Blankfort, a prize-winning writer and former Post co-owner, and his
wife April have just returned from a three-week reporting trip there.
This is the first of a series of articles.

The past has vanished.
Everything that was uttered belongs there.
Now is the time to think of new things.

– Jelaluddin Rumi,
Turkish poet (1207-1273)

Viewed from a cruise ship’s deck, my first sight of Turkey is a huge
black statue on a fog-shrouded hillside, barely discernible amidst
the early-morning mist that shrouds the small Aegean Sea port of
Kusadasi.
The statue’s right arm points northeastward, toward our ultimate
destination this morning, the ruins of ancient Ephesus, now 12 miles
inland but Asia Minor’s greatest port 2,600 years ago. Before
tide-carried silt deposits separated it from the sea, Ephesus was the
gateway of European traders venturing eastward to seek access to the
wandering tribes and riches of long-ago Asia.
Today, Turks are trying to reverse that process. A poor nation 99
percent Muslim and 93 percent in Asia, Turkey is looking westward,
seeking to join the 25-country “club of Christian nations,” the rich
European Union. Calling this “a reconciliation between
civilizations,” Turks hope membership will open up trade
opportunities for Turkish firms, invite more foreign investment,
enhance the nation’s prestige, boost incomes that are barely a fifth
of Europeans – and facilitate Turkey becoming a “bridge” between
Christian Europe and an increasingly restive Arab Muslim world beset
with hate-spewing fundamentalists.
Europeans are hardly unanimous in their eagerness to accept the
Turks. But there’s no doubt that the Turkish national hero honored in
that hillside statue would have welcomed the effort – and most
(though not all) of the profound and positive changes already
occurring in a Turkey of 71 million people revolutionizing itself to
meet European standards.

General Mustafa Kemal – renamed simply Ataturk, “Father of All Turks”
by Parliament in the 1920’s – salvaged today’s
bigger-than-Texas-sized Turkey from the ruins of its defeated Ottoman
Empire after World War I.
Gone was a vast empire that lasted longer and at its peak was larger
than either the Roman or British empire – and had held sway over the
entire Balkans, all of North Africa and the entire Arab Middle East
for 450 years.
Ataturk, who overthrew the once-omnipotent sultan, said Turkey lost
its empire because it was obsessively religious and old-fashioned.
He vowed to remake the new Turkish Republic into “a normal modern
nation” and one “modeled on Europe.”
During his 15 years as dictator-president, secularism became Turkey’s
new religion.
Ataturk moved the capital from Istanbul, the former Constantinople
redolent with mosques and religious history, to Ankara, a small city
hundreds of miles east of the Islamic power structure. He shut down
the dominant Muslim caliphate, put its imams on the government
payroll to better control what they preached, banned religious
headscarves for women and fezzes for men, converted the alphabet from
Arabic into Latin, and moved the day of rest to Sunday from the
Muslim Friday.
Today, ironically, Turkey’s attempt to fulfill Ataturk’s secular,
European dream is being led by a devout Muslim. When Prime Minister
Recep Rayip Erdogan (pronounced Ehr-duh-won) was mayor of Istanbul,
he was jailed in 1999 and banned from public life for three years for
reciting in public a poem that talked of Muslim minarets as bayonets
– deemed an incitement to a religious uprising.
But only three years later, fed up with corrupt politicians and a
sick economy, Turkish voters gave a huge victory to Erdogan’s new
Justice and Development Party, ostensibly secular but many of whose
leaders were those of a more militantly Muslim party deposed by the
army in 1997.
Aided by the votes of newly politicized devout rural Muslims who were
swarming into the cities, Erdogan’s party, in a multi-party election,
won 38 percent of votes and almost two-thirds of legislative seats.
Paradoxically, because he was still on probation, Erdogan had to wait
several months after his party’s victory before assuming the prime
ministry. Moreover, because his wife insists on wearing headscarves,
she is barred from attending government functions.

Still, to all Turks, religious or not, almost three quarters of a
century after his untimely death from alcoholism in 1938 at the age
of 57, Ataturk remains a virtual deity. Large photos of him bedeck
every classroom, huge statues of him dominate public squares in every
city and town, portraits of him on glass or on plates or in oil or
watercolors decorate walls and mantelpieces throughout the country.

It is slightly before dusk, the end of an ordinary September weekday,
at Ankara’s massive two-square-block Ataturk Mausoleum and Museum.
But even this late the crowds are huge and the lines are long to view
his coffin. Many on line have come from the provinces and are dressed
very formally, as if going to visit the great man himself, rather
than simply his coffin.
I think back to when I viewed the preserved waxed bodies of Lenin in
Moscow and Mao Zedong in Beijing.
There the crowds are hustled along by guards after a quick look.
But here, even though there is no body to see, those on line pause
long and solemnly before the coffin, to think some thoughts, be in
touch with their own feelings, as they savor the moment. Many have
cameras, and husbands take pictures of wives, and wives of husbands,
and then of the children, before the coffin that was the resting
place of the remains of Turkey’s greatest hero.
Some simply stand and stare, their eyes visibly swelling up with
tears.

In a nation of uncertain ethnic identity for most, Ataturk had little
patience for the problems of ethnic minorities or disputes over where
Turks came from.
To him, every resident of the Turkish Republic should simply consider
himself a Turk. And those who weren’t were kicked out in 1920’s
exchanges of population (except in cities) — even though the
families of many, like those of Greek ancestry, had lived in Turkey
for hundreds of years.
Same for the Armenians who had been the target of a genocide or at
least a massacre a decade earlier. Ataturk was hardly a devotee of
democracy.
He ruled with a heavy hand, backed up by a military lionized by the
population for having retaken a lot of Turkish land lost during World
War I.
He did not hesitate to be tough or torture or execute his political
enemies. Turkey did not have an election for more than a decade after
he assumed office and remained a one-party state, Ataturk’s party,
until 1946, some 23 years after he took power and eight years after
his death.
Ataturk’s constitution provided a special role for the military, as
guardians of the nation’s secularism and stability. Under it, the
military forcibly overthrew elected (and corrupt and unpopular)
governments in 1960, 1970 and 1980, and forced the resignation in
1997 of a coalition government headed by an avowedly devout prime
minister.
But the European Union insists on tight civilian control over the
military.
So, officially at least, the Turkey’s conscripted military, half a
million strong, this year was defanged – with its consent, the
constitution was changed to take away its majority and chairmanship
of the all-powerful National Security Council.
Still, many Turks view the military favorably, noting that even under
the sultans its officer corps attracted Turkey’s best and brightest,
that it has been a hedge against corrupt and inept leaders, and that
when it has seized power, it has relinquished it to civilians after
relatively short periods.
The military’s declining influence is costing it money. This year,
for the first time in modern Turkey’s 81-year history, the nation
will spend more on education than on defense.
It also proved costly to the United States which last year wanted to
use Turkey as a base for 62,000 troops to invade Iraq from the north.
Insiders say the Turkish military backed the U.S. request and in the
old days would have gotten its wish.
But, mindful that Turkish public opinion was overwhelmingly opposed,
the Turkish Parliament turned down the Americans (by one vote).

Turkey first applied for European Union membership in 1987 but let
its application languish because tariff-protected Turkish companies
were reluctant to abide by European free-trade rules.
But when, with its economy faltering, it revived its application in
2001, the EU made clear that Turkey would have to start cleaning up
its act if it were to be considered.
To comply, Parliament in September adopted an entirely new, more
humane penal code. It reduced hundreds of draconian sentences,
outlawed torture (long a staple of Turkish police interrogations),
banned the death penalty, wiped out censorship laws and restrictions
on free speech, eliminated barriers to expressions of ethnic identity
and required juveniles who break the law to be treated in juvenile
courts until 18 (before, they were treated as criminals as young as
15). Gone too were laws that provided more severe penalties for abuse
of virgins than non-virgins.
“Nowhere in the world have so many laws that affect you from the day
you are born until the day you die been passed in such a rush,” said
Sezgin Tankirikulu, Bar Association president in Dyarbakir, a
stronghold of the long-persecuted Kurdish minority, about the new
penal codes and civil codes rushed through to meet European Union
deadlines.
Unfortunately, he added, the codes don’t allow a lot of time (a month
for the civil code, six months for the penal one) for judges and the
public to easily adapt.
But many Turks are delighted.
“The best thing about our EU application,” said a prominent Turk who
asked to remain anonymous “isn’t that it will open up a huge market
for our products or that we’ll get economic support to elevate our
standard of living. That’s all years away. The best thing is that
they’ve pressured us into doing the things that we should have been
doing on our own initiative decades ago.”
But some people aren’t so sure.

Professor Muntaz Soysal is a man of principle. That’s why we’re
interviewing him in his tiny office in a small newspaper where he is
a columnist; he used to be a columnist for Turkey’s biggest newspaper
but the owner fired him, he said, because he refused to use his
political contacts to further the owner’s business dealings.
And principle is why, at 75. he is founding a new political party.
He thinks that his previous party, the junior party in a two-party
parliament, in its eagerness to embrace the EU, is betraying
Ataturk’s principles.
But the allegedly betrayed principle that the four of us interviewing
Soysal found most curious (my wife and I were joined on the reporting
trip by Professor Richard Feinberg, a former member of President
Clinton’s National Security Council, and his wife) was Soysal’s
defense of a military establishment that imprisoned him for a year
and a half after its 1970 coup.
Soysal explained he was dean of the faculty at Ankara University when
military officers accused him of “subverting youth” – because, he
explained, they objected to the university curriculum that included
readings about the world’s communist regimes.
Nevertheless, Soysal, son of a naval officer says, “The military is
one of the few progressive forces in Turkey that, despite its
occasional mistakes and the fact that it can be cruel, has very
little corruption compared with other sectors, is a force for
progress and enjoys the respect and confidence of the people.”
Soysal says the Erdogan government is using the European Union as an
excuse to undermine the military.
He is not necessarily opposed to Turkey joining the EU, he says, but
as a Turkish nationalist follower of Ataturk, he is opposed to its
emphasis on globalization and business privatization – he believes
the Turkish people are better off with Turkey’s government, not
profit-seeking companies and particularly not foreign ones, in
control of its crucial resources and economic sectors. He also
objects to the EU’s stress on the rights of ethnic groups and
minorities.

Turkey’s application to join the European Union got a boost last
month when the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, ruled
that Turkey had made enough progress toward fulfilling EU standards
to merit beginning long-term negotiations, taking 10 to 15 years,
toward eventual membership.
In a ringing endorsement, the commission’s president, Italy’s Romano
Prodi, said, “We cannot imagine a Europe in which Turkey is not
firmly aboard.”
But the decision survived some harrowing moments when, in adopting
the new penal code, the Erodogan government inserted a clause to
criminalize adultery.
It said legal punishment (three years in prison) for adultery would
diminish “honor killings” still sometimes imposed in rural Turkey by
relatives against women whose extra-marital sexual activities are
frowned upon.
Faced with opposition from women’s groups and from legislators, large
numbers of whom Turkish newspapers said had mistresses (Islam permits
up to four wives, though Turkish law doesn’t), the government
capitulated when EU officials declared that criminalizing adultery
would contravene European standards – i.e., be a deal-breaker.
Still, the Financial Times said the adultery proposal underscored a
major problem in Turkey joining the European Union – “Turkey is
becoming a re-religious society in a post-religious Europe.”
If this is true, it would undercut a major reason of Europeans
favoring Turkey’s EU entry – that it would be an example to
fundamentalist-leaning Middle East countries that secularization
offers economic advantages and international acceptance.
Next month, on Dec. 17, the European Parliament will make a final
decision on whether to begin serious negotiations with Turkey. One
big problem Europe faces is the disparity in Turkey’s economy – the
European Union subsidizes its poorer countries to bring about mutual
prosperity; with a European’s average annual income now over five
times a Turk’s $4,000 per person, this could become expensive.
The income gap was even greater only three years ago when Turkey’s
economy was in chaos. It’s less now but, if they act quickly, foreign
visitors can still enjoy a unique pleasure, a hangover from the bad
old days.

Wanna feel like a millionaire, spend like a millionaire? It’s pretty
easy in today’s Turkey. The country has the world’s
highest-denomination banknotes,
Simply exchange $10, for example, and instantly you have 1,500,000
Turkish lira. That’s enough to buy a decent American breakfast in a
good restaurant along Istanbul’s up-scale Istiklal Boulevard,
including tip and some Turkish touches like feta cheese, olives and
yogurt. If you’re into Turkish carpets, you could even feel like a
billionaire. A thousand-dollar carpet, for example, comes to 1.5
billion lira.
That’s because decades of runaway inflation saw prices escalating as
much as 70 percent annually over many years.
But, thanks to belt-tightening measures that the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) demanded in return for big loans, the annual
inflation rate has tumbled to below 10 percent – lowest since the
early 1930s. That’s good news to Turks whose salary increases
constantly was lagging behind price increases but bad news for those
who like to continue to feel like millionaires or billionaires.
Convinced the currency is now stable, the government on Jan. 1 will
issue new currency knocking off the last six digits on lira notes;
thus 15,000,000 lira will become simply 15 lira. But it will require
the same $10 to buy the same breakfast.

Before the IMF bailout, the Turkish government in 2001 owed so much
money that it faced bankruptcy.
In return for the loan, the IMF offered – indeed ordered-tough
love…a slash in government expenses that included many employee
layoffs, government takeover of banks loaded with uncollectable
loans, opening the Turkish market to foreign companies, ending
Ataturk-legacy protectionism, privatizing many state-owned
enterprises, enforcing tax laws long collecting dust on the shelves
but not collecting money for the treasury.
Not all of these measures are fully operative, and some have
increased unemployment but their start and the consequent currency
stability has sent the Turkish stock market soaring and interest
rates tumbling, encouraging a whopping 8 percent growth in the
economy this year.
Interest rates, 70 percent at the beginning of the Iraq invasion, in
18 months have dropped by almost two-thirds, to below 25 percent. The
Iraq war has helped.
Turkey, bordering Iraq, is the world’s biggest overland conduit for
Iraqi food and other supplies.
Despite several tragic killings and hostage-taking of drivers, almost
a thousand Turkish trucks, traveling in convoys, regularly funnel
goods to Iraq.
At the start of the last century, Turkey was called “the sick man of
Europe.” Though its Ottoman Empire still held most of the Balkans,
Turkey by then had lost Greece as well as Egypt, the Balkans were
restive, Russia armies were nipping at its heels, and its economy was
collapsing.
Today, Europeans who question Turkey’s European Union overtures
wonder whether Turkey, sick or not, is even European, in fact and at
heart.
Former French President Giscard d’Estaing, for example, says Turkey
is not a European country and its EU membership would mean “the end
of Europe.”
Only 7 percent of its land lies in Europe and, questioners contend,
its legacy of torture, militarism, executions and disrespect of human
rights indicate a lack of European values.
They also wonder whether the European Union should extend itself to
the very borders of troubled Middle East countries like Iran, Syria
and Iraq, all of which abut Turkey, or whether, on the other hand,
this might influence these important resource-rich nations positively
in a democratic non-fundamentalist direction.
But, with or without Turkey, Europeans will have no choice in
interacting with Muslims, integration supporters point out.
About 20 million Muslims already live in Europe, and with low
European birth rates presaging a severe future labor shortage,
demographers say Europe could well have a majority Muslim population
by the end of this century. So can it much longer call itself a
Christian continent?
Meanwhile, though, Turkey’s shadow looms large. With 71 million
people and growing, it will soon be more populous than any single
European country.
Under the EU’s proposed population-based weighted voting system, it
thus could be decisive in forming alliances with other countries to
become the biggest factor in determining European political and
economic policies.

The European Parliament will weigh all of these factors Dec. 17. Even
as European leaders assure their own dubious people that it would be
a long time before Turkey is admitted (and at the time would be
subject to referendum in some countries), those close to the scene
expect Turkey to get the unanimous go-ahead that is required to start
serious talks.
“It’s irreversible,” said Ozdem Sanberk, over coffee in our Istanbul
hotel. Sanberk was Turkey’s ambassador to Great Britain for 10 years
and is now a think-tank leader and TV personality. He added, “It is
impossible to continue to hold Turkey in uncertainty in perpetuity.”
And if Turkey is rejected – if not on Dec. 17, some time later?
Some say, I note, that Turkey’s rejection would be viewed by Arab
terrorists as confirming their view that the West is anti-Muslim and
even anti-Arab (though Turkey is not an Arab country).
“It is difficult to foresee the consequence once hope is lost,”
Sanberk replied. “A surge of anti-western activity in Turkey? A
turning of the Turks to Arab nations? An internal battle between the
middle class and the religious? A breakup of the country into
something like the Arab emirates?
Once Pandora’s box is opened, the repercussions are severe. But I
don’t foresee anything bad happening.
Turkey is pinning its hopes on Europe and I don’t think the Europeans
will let us down.”
***
Next: Turkey and the U.S: Old buddies, new realities.

,1413,292~30280~2522444,00.html

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

CONSTRUCTION OF “STEPANAKERT-SARUSHEN-KARMIR SHUKA” PART OF “NORTH-SOUTH”
ROAD COMPLETED

Azg/Arm
10 Nov 04

“Hayastan” Pan-Armenian Fund informed that n November 8 the
construction of “Stepanakert-Sarushen-Karmir Shuka” part of
“North-South” Road is completed. This part of the road stretches
14kms.

In the course of the four years passed from the beginning
of the construction 57,2kms of the road have already been
constructed. Construction of 31,5 kms is ahead. The road stretching
from Stepanakert to Hadrut will pass though all the five regions
of Nagorno Karabakh Republic. In Stepanakert it will join “Goris
Stepanakert” road.

“North-East” is considered the skeleton of Artsakh and will pass
through over 20 dwelling places of the republic.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress