Author: Andres-Papazian

KOBE BRYANT, SOUTH AFRICA AND THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE: LESSONS LEARNED AND LESSONS WHICH NEED TO BE LEARNED
by Vache Thomassian

Haytoug

Dec 15 2010

Kobe Bryant is one of the most recognizable and popular athletes in
the world. He is also not strapped for cash, considering his net worth
is estimated at $140 million. So the announcement this week that the
Lakers superstar signed a 2-year endorsement deal to lend his fame and
charisma to sell Turkish Airline tickets came as a bit of a surprise.

The Armenian Youth Federation was quick to respond to the deal by
releasing a statement calling for Bryant to take a moral stand and
rescind his contract. However, some community members have viewed
this ~Shard-lined~T approach as unwarranted~Wreferring to Bryant as a
businessman who is simply following the dollar signs, or pointing out
that Bryant isn~Rt an Armenian and therefore would not be interested
in the Armenian Genocide.

These perspectives raise concerns about the way we think about
ourselves, leading to two important points which have to be made
clear: 1) The denial of the Armenian Genocide is not an ~SArmenian
only~T issue; 2) We underestimate our true capacity to bring change.

We can look back in history to elaborate these points. From the 1940~Rs
to the 1990~Rs South Africa was ruled by one political party which
implemented a policy of legal racial segregation known as apartheid.

The minority white population held all the political power and
subjugated the black majority to dehumanizing conditions. In the
1970~Rs an international movement began that encouraged investors
to withdraw direct investment in South African companies and pushed
citizens to stop supporting US based companies which had business
interests in South Africa, as an act of protest against apartheid.

The movement grew as stockholders pressed their boards of directors,
and investors became weary. The movement grew as universities like
Berkeley, Stanford and Columbia organized their campuses to divest
billions in endowment and bond money from companies with South
African ties. This movement was lead by youth and fueled in part by
celebrities using their fame to raise awareness for the cause. The
billions of dollars that stopped flowing-in undoubtedly got the South
African government~Rs attention. US cities and states followed suit,
passing divestment legislation, all leading up to the ~SComprehensive
Anti-Apartheid Act~T in 1986 which banned new US investments and
military sales to South Africa.

The divestment campaign, coupled with the internal struggle of the
oppressed population, led to the dismemberment of the apartheid
government in South Africa in the early 1990~Rs. Divestment from
apartheid South Africa was lead by people like you: the consumer who
asked where their products came from, the student who organized her
campus, the union member who pressured her company, the religious
leader who encouraged their parish, the musician who wrote a song;
people who otherwise, individually, could never have made a difference.

Today we see another divestment movement which has taken shape. The
Genocide currently taking place in Darfur, Sudan has resulted
in the murder of almost half a million. Celebrities, like George
Clooney and Don Cheadle have given their time and support, not to
make a petty profit, but to raise awareness about the desperate
situation. The Al-Bashir government (which unsurprisingly has strong
ties with the government of Turkey), has ignored all international
humanitarian efforts and continues its genocidal policies. The move
to economically isolate the Sudan may be the last hope to stop a
catastrophic situation.

The mindset that led the divestment movement is the mindset that our
communities and youth should be driven by today.

Justice for the Armenian Genocide is an international human rights
issue that belongs on the minds of every single investor in the
Republic of Turkey, and every person~Wcelebrity, athlete, actor,
socialite~Wwho endorses or supports the government or trade with the
government. The moral difficulty of dealing with a company which does
business in Turkey should be enough of a factor to dissuade any deal,
for any amount of money.

Here, when I see a public figure like Kobe Bryant associate himself
with a Turkish company, my reaction is not a knee-jerk hate-inspired
reaction, it~Rs a confident reaction that says, ~SIf he knew the facts,
he would quickly change his mind.~T

Turkish Airlines is not only the national airlines of Turkey; the
government of Turkey owns 49.1% of the company. It~Rs also a prime
example of the public relations work the government is doing to try
to repair decades of negativity as a result of its human rights record.

Our choice is to either accept what we think is invincible, or connect
our cause, organize and have our concerns heard.

It may seem trivial for an activist youth organization to become
a thorn in the side of a multi-million dollar basketball icon, but
the fact of the matter remains that a principled stance must be taken
when it comes to supporting a genocide-denying regime like the current
Turkish government. Much like the South African example demonstrated,
decades of inhumanity can succumb to the power of the dollar, and to
the power of organization.

Unfortunately, this article is not a call for us to divest from
Turkey, because my honest opinion is that we aren~Rt ready for that
step~Eyet. We have a hard enough time convincing Armenian grocery
store owners and importers to stop selling Turkish tomato paste,
when the Armenian alternatives are readily available. We have a hard
enough time of convincing our new generation that an act of protest
is not a one day a year occurrence. And we have a hard enough time
convincing some people that our fight for genocide recognition has
nothing to do with hating the enemy, and has everything to do with
loving our own people.

This is just a first step that says our fight should be everyone~Rs
fight and our power does not yet even know it~Rs potential.

_____ Vaché Thomassian is a member of the Armenian Youth Federation
Central Executive and the Editor of Haytoug magazine.

From: A. Papazian

US EMBASSY CABLES: BP ACCUSED OF ‘MILD BLACKMAIL’ BY AZERBAIJAN DURING WINTER GAS SHORTAGE

guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 15 December 2010 21.30 GMT

Article historyTuesday, 05 December 2006, 15:44 C O N F I D E N T I
A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BAKU 001771 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR DAS BRYZA EO
12958 DECL: 12/04/2016 TAGS ENRG, GA, PGOV, PREL, TU, AJ SUBJECT:
AZERBAIJAN: PRESIDENT ALIYEV ON UPCOMING GAS TRILATERAL REF: BAKU
1720 Classified By: Ambassador Anne E. Derse, Reasons 1.4 (b,d)

1. (U) ACTION REQUEST: Please see Paragraph 10.

2. (C) SUMMARY: President Aliyev told the Ambassador on December 5 that
he expected the December 8 Trilateral meeting of Energy Ministers in
Tbilisi to “clarify” whether Turkey was willing to help Georgia with
its winter gas problems. He said Azerbaijan would host a subsequent
December 14 meeting in Baku among Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey,
plus BP and Statoil. Aliyev again blamed BP for linking commercial
issues to the current gas problems, and reported that “nothing had
changed” in Azerbaijan,s gas negotiations with Russia during Russia
PM Fradkov,s visit to Baku. END SUMMARY.

3. (C) On December 5 the Ambassador met with President Aliyev and
discussed both energy and press freedom issues (septel). Energyoff
was notetaker.

Russian PM Fradkov Visit Readout

——————————————–

4. (C) Concerning the just concluded visit to Baku of Russian Prime
Minister Mikhail Fradkov, Aliyev said that “nothing had changed”
concerning the Gazprom offer of gas to Azerbaijan at 1.5 billion cubic
meters (bcm) at USD 230 per thousand cubic meters (mcm). Aliyev said
that Russia knows Azerbaijan will not buy at this price, which would
be more expensive than Azerbaijan’s burning mazut in its power plants.

Aliyev said that he did not even seek to raise the issue with Fradkov,
but that Fradkov had broached it. Aliyev said that Fradkov contended
that the Gazprom offer was not “anti-Azerbaijan,” and was purely a
commercial decision, but Aliyev added that Gazprom’s sales of gas to
Ukraine at USD 130 per mcm belies this claim. Aliyev said that Russia
justifies its lower gas sales price to Armenia by its being Armenia’s
close ally and by purchase of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline, by which,
he said, Russia seeks to control strategic future gas export routes
to Europe. Russia was trying to “circle the European gas market,”
which also was influencing its negotiations with Belarus, but here
too there has not been an agreement on sales price.

5. (C) Aliyev said that Fradkov also proposed that Russia could
help Azerbaijan in transporting its gas to third countries, although
Aliyev told the Ambassador his response was that he did not see how
such ‘help’ would be possible. Fradkov told Aliyev that Russia was
going to need more gas for domestic use, which would reduce volumes
it could sell to Europe. Aliyev said that Russia was working with
Algeria to form a gas monopoly.

Gas Trilat

————

6. (C) The Ambassador said she knew that Aliyev had had a good
discussion with DAS Bryza on energy issues in Minsk and with Georgian
PM Noghaideli when he visited Baku on November 30, and that based
on the latter meeting there was going to be a trilateral meeting of
the Turkish, Georgian and Azerbaijani Energy Ministers in Tbilisi
on December 8. Aliyev said Georgian and Azerbaijan shared a common
strategic vision on energy issues, would be coordinating closely in
this regard, and as such, during Noghaideli’s December 4-14 visit
to the United States he would be delivering an Azerbaijani message
as well as a Georgian one (Comment: The Georgian Ambassador told the
Ambassador on December 5 that in his US visit Georgian PM Noghaideli
would ask Secretary Rice and Vice-President Cheney to “encourage” BP
to help this winter). Aliyev said that he had expected the Turkish
and Georgian governments to have had positive discussions prior
to Noghaideli’s November 30 visit to Baku but that this did not
happen, and that the answer Georgia received from Turkey at that
time concerning redistribution of Shah Deniz gas was negative, and
contrary to the common understanding arrived at in July 2006 among
the leaders of the three countries.

BAKU 00001771 002 OF 003

Aliyev said he felt that “the Turkish approach was not sincere,”
and as such Azerbaijan and Georgia needed to coordinate tactics and
strategy. At a recent high-level meeting of his government Aliyev
said he stressed his commitment to the longer-term strategic project
of delivering Caspian gas to Europe and that “Azerbaijan should not
sacrifice its long-term energy strategy for day-to-day needs.”

Azerbaijan’s strategic goal, which Aliyev said was currently more
important for Europe than it was for Azerbaijan, was to enter European
markets. Putin is saying that Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan cannot
supply gas to Europe – “if we don’t do it, we lose the battle.” As
such, Azerbaijan has put forward the best possible solution for the
short-term gas crunch: some gas for Georgia, some for Turkey, some
for Azerbaijan, and some for Greece.

7. (C) The Ambassador said that the Georgians have been led to
believe that the Turkish government is going to be more positive in
the December 8 Tbilisi meeting, although she could not confirm this
assessment (Comment: the Georgian Ambassador told the Ambassador on
December 5 that Georgia’s Embassy in Ankara has reported that the
Turkish Foreign Ministry is saying that Turkey is now ready to discuss
redistributing its 2007 Shah Deniz gas volumes) . She said that DAS
Bryza has suggested that after the December 8 trilateral, it might be
useful to have another trilateral meeting on December 14 in Baku with
the inclusion of BP and Statoil, and she asked the President for his
opinion. Aliyev said that “we don’t have time to wait,” noting that
the winter holidays were fast approaching. He said he approved the
proposed December 14 meeting — trilateral plus BP and Statoil — and
would be willing for Baku to host it. He added that he had wanted Baku
to host the December 8 meeting, but deferred to the Georgian desire to
have it in Tbilisi. He said USG involvement in the December 14 meeting
would be useful. He said that the December 8 Tbilisi meeting would
be very important as it would ‘clarify’ the Turkish position, i.e.

whether they were willing to help, and that the December 14 meeting
would be similarly important as it would clarify whether BP was
willing to help.

BP’s Dangerous Game

—————————-

8. (C) Aliyev said that BP could deliver more associated gas from the
ACG field to Azerbaijan for domestic use, but that it was linking its
cooperation in this regard with its desire to extend its Production
Sharing Agreement (PSA) with Azerbaijan to develop ACG deep gas.

Aliyev said it was inappropriate for BP to link all of its issues such
as PSA extension, ACG deep gas, transportation tariff agreements and
others into one bundle; it also was inappropriate for BP to link the
solution of those issues to Azerbaijan’s “temporary troubles.” He said
that BP was using “mild blackmail” and argued that BP must instead
act in good faith. Aliyev said that he had instructed his officials
to tell BP that if it were not “supportive” with ACG associated gas,
it would not get its way with PSA extension and ACG deep gas. “If BP
won’t give us more ACG associated gas, I have instructed our officials
to tell them no PSA extensions or ACG deep gas,” Aliyev underscored.

He said that he did not want this to happen, since from an economic
viewpoint both the AIOC Consortium and Azerbaijan would benefit from
extending the PSA and for the Consortium being the ones to develop
ACG deep gas. But it was not just Azerbaijan, but also Europe and
Georgia who had a stake in this issue. Aliyev concluded by saying
that if Turkey agreed to redistribute its 2007 Shah Deniz gas that
“would almost be the way out,” but that then Azerbaijan would still
need BP support in both redistributing this Shah Deniz gas and also
in giving Azerbaijan more ACG associated gas.

9. (C) The President also mused that “we could cut the gas supply to
Turkey” if need be. The Ambassador pointed out that this would be an
extreme measure with serious repercussions. She asked Aliyev if he
knew the reasons for Turkish truculence concerning gas redistribution.

He said he did not, but suspected it could be monetary, i.e. buying
gas at USD 120 per mcm and selling it at USD 230. He also

BAKU 00001771 003 OF 003

conjectured that Turkey could be under serious pressure from Russia.

10. ACTION REQUEST: Ambassador will meet with BP Azerbaijan President
Bill Schrader December 8. Department’s guidance, particularly
information on the message being delivered to BP officials in
Washington, is requested. DERSE

From: A. Papazian

PROSPECTS FOR KARABAKH PEACE RECEDE AFTER OSCE SUMMIT
Emil Danielyan

Jamestown.org

Eurasia Daily Monitor
Dec 16 2010

The prospects for resolving the Karabakh conflict are as uncertain
as ever after the inability of Armenia and Azerbaijan’s presidents
to reach any tangible agreements on the margins of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) summit in Astana on
December 1-2. It marked an apparent failure of the latest international
effort to facilitate a Karabakh settlement spearheaded by Russia and
President, Dmitry Medvedev, in particular.

Medvedev invested considerable time and energy in the peace process,
hosting seven face-to-face meetings between his Armenian and
Azerbaijani counterparts since taking office in 2008. Following
the most recent of those talks held in Astrakhan, southern Russia
on October 27, Medvedev expressed “moderate optimism” that the two
sides would make decisive progress towards peace in time for the OSCE
summit. That announcement was followed by a new flurry of activity
by the Russian, US and French diplomats co-chairing the OSCE’s Minsk
Group on Karabakh. Mediators shuttled between Baku and Yerevan in late
November after meeting with Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov,
in Moscow. On November 22, Lavrov had also held a trilateral meeting
with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts (Regnum, ITAR-TASS,
November 22).

Presidents Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan
did not even meet in Astana and only signed a joint statement there
with Medvedev, French Prime Minister, Francois Fillon, and US Secretary
of State, Hillary Clinton.

According to the statement, the signatories “agreed that the time has
come for more decisive efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict,”
adding “They further agreed that a peaceful, negotiated settlement
will bring stability and security and is the only way to bring real
reconciliation to the peoples of the region.” The statement added
that the mediators urged Aliyev and Sargsyan to “focus with renewed
energy on the issues that still remain in the Basic Principles”
of a peaceful settlement (, December 1).

It was a clear indication that the conflicting parties had failed to
move further forward in ironing out their disagreements over those
principles. Aliyev and Sargsyan made this even more evident by trading
bitter recriminations in their speeches during the two-day summit.

Aliyev accused the Armenians of committing “war crimes and a genocide”
against Karabakh’s Azeri population during the 1991-1994 war and
dragging out peace talks since then (APA, December 1).

Sargsyan, for his part, alleged that Azerbaijan had unleashed a
“policy of ethnic cleansing and fully-fledged military aggression”
against the Karabakh Armenians and has now “no interest” in the
conflict’s resolution. More importantly, Sargsyan threatened to
formally recognize Karabakh as an independent state if Baku acts on
its threats to try to win back the disputed territory and Azerbaijani
districts surrounding it by force (Armenian Public Television, December
2). Sargsyan repeated this threat during a December 10 summit in Moscow
of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

Speaking in the Kazakh capital, Clinton said the mediators and the
parties must “renew our efforts toward a settlement in Karabakh” that
would be based on six general principles articulated by the US, French
and Russian presidents in a joint statement in July 2009 issued after
their talks in L’Aquila, Italy (, December 1).

Among those principles are the return of the Armenian-controlled
territories around Karabakh to Azerbaijan and an “interim status”
for Karabakh itself, which would guarantee its “security and
self-governance.” The proposed peace framework also envisages that
Karabakh’s final status would be determined through “a legally binding
expression of will.”

Crucial details of this formula are contained in the still unpublicized
(and repeatedly modified) peace proposals submitted by the Minsk Group
co-chairs to the warring sides for the past five years. The parties
have disagreed, at various points, on the timetable for Armenian troop
withdrawal from the occupied lands, the status of a land corridor
between Armenia and Karabakh and the timing of a future referendum on
self-determination in Karabakh. The latter issue now appears to be
the main area of contention. Baku has insisted, at least until now,
that no specific date should be set for the vote. According to one of
the classified US State Department documents disclosed by WikiLeaks,
Aliyev complained to a visiting top US official in February 2010
that Yerevan wants a referendum date to be fixed in the text of
the peace accord. Also, in his public pronouncements, the Azeri
leader has repeatedly claimed that Karabakh’s predominantly ethnic
Armenian population would only be able to determine the extent of the
territory’s autonomy within Azerbaijan in the proposed referendum. The
Armenian side denies this, saying that the Minsk Group plan allows
for international recognition of Karabakh’s secession from Azerbaijan.

This apparent impasse and other disagreements implies an uncertain
future for the Karabakh negotiating process amid what many experts
believe is a growing risk of another Armenian-Azeri war. Both Russia
and Western powers continue to voice strong opposition to a military
solution to the dispute, which is increasingly threatened by Aliyev.

The latter regularly points to his government’s soaring defense
spending, due to reach a new record high of $3.1 billion in 2011,
compared with only $405 million budgeted for Armenia’s armed forces.

Armenia will continue to seek to offset the Azeri military build-up
by using its military alliance with Russia, which it upgraded earlier
this year. A new defense pact signed by the two nations in late August
commits Moscow to supplying its South Caucasus ally with “modern and
compatible weaponry and special military hardware.” Both Yerevan and
Karabakh’s ethnic Armenian leadership now seem to regard renewed war
as a real possibility.

The Karabakh Armenian army held in mid-November what it described
as its largest ever military exercise just several kilometers away
from Azeri army positions east of Karabakh. A uniform-clad Sargsyan,
who watched the maneuvers with his senior army generals, used the
occasion to warn that Baku will be dealt a “devastating and final”
blow if it resorts to military action (, November 14).

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIANS IN GLENDALE REELING OVER KOBE BRYANT’S AD DEAL WITH TURKISH AIRLINES, OR ‘DIRECT FLIGHT TO INHUMANITY’
By Simone Wilson

LA Weekly

Dec 15 2010

Turkish Airlines had just barely announced its deal with Lakers stud
Kobe Bryant yesterday, when the massive Armenian population in SoCal
came out in full force.

The Armenian Youth Federation reported being “bombarded with phone
calls from concerned Armenian youth asking for a call to action.”

We’re not sure how much the airline offered its sexy new spokesman,
but considering his $30.5 million annual salary…

… it had to be a ridiculous hunk o’ dough. We’re mad about the
Armenian thing and all that, but mostly just dumbfounded a random
foreign airline had that kind of bling to drop on Bryant.

The company quoted him as saying:

“I’m so proud to be chosen as a global brand ambassador for Turkish
Airlines. They have been providing travelers with excellent service for
77 years … Turkey is a country rich in natural beauty and thousands
of years of cultural history, and I’m proud to partner with Turkish
Airlines to bring that majesty to people around the world.”

“Bring that majesty?” Since when do L.A. ballers talk like Eastern
businessmen? Needless to say, we’re pretty sure Bryant’s heartfelt
speech was written by someone from Turkish airlines.

Anyway, the AYF doesn’t think quite as highly of Bryant’s “majestic”
new home away from home; to this day, it points out, Turkey continues
to deny the Armenian Genocide. From the indignant article on their
website:

“The decision has caused uproar within the Armenian-American community
in the United States and especially within Southern California, which
boasts the largest population of Armenians outside of Armenia. As
victims of genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Turkish government
from 1915-1923, Armenians are angered that Bryant would sign a contract
with a country that denies justice to the victims.”

Org leaders then figure that hey, while they’ve got his attention,
they might as well make him their own “global ambassador”:

“The AYF urges Kobe Bryant to stay true to his loyal fan base and
rescind his contract with Turkish Airlines. The AYF further asks
Bryant to put out an official statement affirming his commitment to
ending human rights abuses and voicing his support for House Resolution
252, calling on the United States Congress to properly recognize the
Armenian Genocide.”

That’s kind of a lot to ask from the world’s busiest baller, no? Not
even Obama came through on that one.

Still, for the sake of peace in Glendale, we hope Bryant thinks of
something equally comfy and press-releasey to say about Armenia and
his doting fan base.

“Ninety-five percent, if not 100 percent, of [SoCal Armenians] are
all Laker fans, and he should know that, he should know better than
to put his money before his morality,” AYF officer Artek Santikian
told CBS Los Angeles.

Know who else is Armenian? Lakers teammate Lamar Odom’s wife, Khloe
Kardashian, and her hot-ass sister. So much for Bryant’s shot at a
Kardashian fling. At least his wife is smirking.

From: A. Papazian

THE EUROPEAN UNION ACCEPTED ARMENIAN REQUESTS

TurkishNY

Dec 15 2010

Relations exist between Armenia and the European Union within the
framework of the European Neighborhood Policy Action Plan. Moreover,
negotiations are continuing for Armenia’s partnership into the Union.

Last week on December 7, the EU-Armenia Cooperation Council had
convened in Brussels to which Stefan Fule, the European Commissioner
for Enlargement and European Neighborhood attended from the EU, along
with Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan from Armenia. In the press
release related to this meeting, the Turkey-Armenia protocols have
been mentioned and it has been stated that the Union underlines the
importance of the ratification and implementation of the protocols
without preconditions.

As known, ratifying the protocols without preconditions is Armenia’s
view and means that these documents should be implemented without
taking into consideration the Karabakh Conflict. Turkey’s stance
is the opposite and foresees that the protocols be ratified and
implemented after significant developments taking place for the
Karabakh Conflict. Therefore, the European Union has once again
affirmed that they have accepted Armenia’s views regarding this issue.

Shortly before the aforementioned meeting, the EU-Armenia Parliamentary
Cooperation Committee had convened on December 1st and 2nd in
Brussels. In the section on Turkey-Armenia relations in the Final
Statement and Recommendations of the meeting, certain points have
been highlighted which also reflect Armenian views.

Although temporarily, it is the Armenian Government which has
taken the Turkey-Armenia protocols off the agenda of the Armenian
Parliament. By expressing in the final statement that Armenia has
suspended the ratification of the protocols because Turkey has applied
preconditions, Armenia has tried to be cleared of their action.

On the other hand, in response to Turkey’s request to resolve the
Karabakh Conflict as soon as possible in order to bring the protocols
into effect, it has been stated that the Turkey-Armenia normalization
process and the OSCE Minsk Group negotiations are separate processes.

This way, they have tried to convey that Turkey’s contribution to
the settlement of the Karabakh Conflict is unacceptable or at least
undesirable.

Furthermore, this statement has also called on Turkey to lift the
blockade imposed on Armenia prior to the ratification of the protocols
as a gesture of good will.

Moreover, it has urged Turkey to establish diplomatic and good
neighborly relations with Armenia without preconditions and to open
the closed border at an early date.

Last of all, the statement has recalled the European Parliament’s
resolution of 18 June 1987 which has recognized the Armenian genocide
allegations. The most important section of the resolution which is
still valid today is that Turkey’s refusal to acknowledge the Armenian
genocide allegations will constitute an obstacle to its accession to
the European Union.

In short, the matters which Armenia has defended all along have been
acknowledged by the EU Cooperation Committee and on the contrary to
the general practice, they have not even bothered to create a balance
between these and the views of the Turkish side.

It is possible to draw two conclusions from this meeting. The first
is that the EU acknowledging the Armenian views shows that this
organization gives support to Armenia, but at the same time, their
unfavorable stance towards Turkey is continuing. The second is that
Armenia, which has easily imposed their views on the EU, will adopt a
much more uncompromising approach in the future, in the normalization
process of their relations with Turkey.

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIA: RELIGIOUS GROUPS CRITICISE LAW LIMITING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

AsiaNews, Hong Kong
Dec 15 2010

Amendments to the law would require “expert opinion” before religious
groups are authorised with the state retaining the right to withdraw
permits. “Illegal” religious activities would be severely punished.

For the government, the Council of Europe will vet the proposed
amendments. However, …

Wednesday, December 15, 2010By Asia News

Yerevan (AsiaNews/F18) – Religious groups have slammed proposed
changes to Armenia’s religious laws. The government has countered
that the new rules will be examined and approved by the Council of
Europe before they come into effect.

Not everyone is convinced. “All these laws so closely regulating
religious activity represent an intrusion on the part of the
government,” one religious leader, who asked not to be identified,
told Forum 18. “We are very worried, as several points are a very
real threat to religious freedom,” Armen Lusyan of Yerevan’s Word of
Life Protestant Church said, as he spoke to Forum 18.

Under the proposed amendments, a religious organisation would be
authorised “on the basis of an expert opinion of its religiousness”.

It would also be subject to review of its “doctrine”, something that
could be extended to all other aspects of the group’s life, including
its activities, its views on family and education, as well as any
limitations it might impose on the civil rights of its members. If
expert opinion was negative, applications for recognition could be
turned down.

The amendments would leave unchanged the requirement (introduced in
1997) of a membership of 200 adults before a religious organisation
is officially recognised; however, the latter would not be allowed,
“to engage in activities conflicting with the objectives envisaged
by its statute or prohibited by law”. This includes respect for its
members and their property.

Even after recognition, religious groups would be required to submit
a detailed annual report on their activities in relation to their
social activities (charity, construction, health care and education)
and other events (celebrations, pilgrimage, concerts, camping).

Failure to provide such information or engaging in religious activity
without prior recognition would be punished with fines of up to 500
times the minimum wage.

The state also reserves the right to revoke a permit and ban the
activities of religious groups that breach “public security and
public order”, damage “public health and morality”, violate “human
rights and freedoms,” intervene arbitrarily in the life of families,
push people to refuse “civil obligations prescribed by the law” or
“commit other illegal actions”.

Using material, moral and other inducements to proselytise would also
be against the law. Exploiting inexperience or mental disabilities is
banned. Offenders could be punished with up to three months in prison
and hefty fines (500 to 1,000 times the minimum wage). Praying in
kindergarten, schools and other places of education or teaching as
well as social institutions is banned as well.

Religious groups object to the amendments, saying that they would
limit religious freedom and grant the majority Armenian Apostolic
Church undue privileges.

For Lusyan, with such new powers the authorities could ban even the
most mundane activity like using books and websites to promote one’s
faith because they could be deemed “proselytising”.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are particularly concerned since some of the
prohibitions would directly touch upon their beliefs (like their
opposition to compulsory military service or their refusal to accept
blood transfusions).

For its part, the government insisted that the proposed amendments are
to be examined by the European Commission for Democracy through Law
(aka the Venice Commission), a body of the Council of Europe, which
made public the proposed changes on its website on 30 November. The
review is expected to be formally adopted at the Venice Commission
plenary meeting on 17 and 18 December in Venice.

For Armenian authorities, this should provide enough guarantees to
religious minorities. What is more, changes would eventually have
to come before parliament where there will be a broad opportunity to
discuss them.

However, Rev Rene Leonian, head of the Armenian Evangelical Church,
is “very surprised” that the Armenian government sent the proposed
amendments to the Venice Commission without first informing and
consulting local religious communities.

From: A. Papazian

KOBE TURK DELIGHT RILES ARMENIANS

Herald Sun, Australia

Dec 16 2010

A NEW endorsement deal for LA Lakers’ Kobe Bryant has outraged the
Los Angeles Armenian community.

Bryant’s two-year deal with Turkish Airlines to become its “global
brand ambassador” has set off an uproar among his Armenian fan base
due to long-simmering historical tensions between Turks and Armenians.

“We got non-stop calls to the office,” says Casper Jivalagian of
the Armenian Youth Federation. “They’re all like, ‘what are you guys
going to do about this?'”

The outrage stems primarily from the killing of about 1.5 million
Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire beginning in 1915.

Armenians call the event a genocide but the Turkish government,
while acknowledging many Armenians died during that time period,
has never accepted the term and says the deaths were the result of
a civil war with massacres associated with both sides.

The Armenian community commemorates the horrific period with annual
marches and continues to call on the Turkish government to acknowledge
its role, CBS reported.

“Ninety-five per cent, if not 100 per cent, of those people are all
Lakers fans, and he should know that. He should know better than to
put his money before his morality,” Artek Santikian said referring
to LA’s Armenian community.

The airline’s ads starring Bryant are slated to begin airing in the
US and Middle East early next year.

The five-time NBA champion told CBS Tuesday night that he was excited
about his new deal.

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIANS GIVEN GO-AHEAD FOR LAWSUIT OVER TURKISH GENOCIDE INSURANCE BENEFITS

AllGov.com
Dec 15 2010

Armenian Genocide Survivors (photo: Armenian Reporter) A class action
lawsuit involving the nearly century-old Armenia genocide has been
cleared to proceed in U.S. federal court after a panel of appellate
judges reversed its own decision from last year.

Lead plaintiff Vazken Movsesian and other Californian Armenians filed
their lawsuit in 2003 against two German insurers owned by Munich Re.

Seeking damages for bad faith, breach of contract and constructive
trust, the plaintiffs relied on a California law giving genocide
victims until the end of 2010 to file insurance claims.

The mass extermination of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire occurred
between 1915 and 1923. No official death toll exists, but estimates
range from half a million to 1.5 million people.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the plaintiffs in 2009,
arguing that federal policy forbade California from recognizing
the genocide. In its new ruling, the court cited ~Sthe number
of expressions of federal executive and legislative support for
recognition of the Armenian genocide~T and decided to allow the case
to proceed.

-Noel Brinkerhoff

From: A. Papazian

RA NA SPEAKER HOVIK ABRAHAMYAN RECEIVES THE ARGENTINEAN DIPLOMAT, DOCTOR LEANDRO DESPUI

National Assembly
parliament.am
Dec 15 2010
Armenia

On December 15 the Speaker of RA National Assembly Hovik Abrahamyan
received the Argentinean diplomat, Doctor Leandro Despui. The latter
takes part at The Crime of Genocide: Prevention, Condemnation and
Elimination of Consequences International Conference in Yerevan. The
Conference is dedicated to the adoption of the UN Convention on
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The NA Chief
of Staff Gegham Gharibjanyan and the head of NA ARF faction Vahan
Hovhannisyan attended the meeting.

The NA Speaker highly assessed the relations between Armenia and
Argentina and the Armenian-Argentinean friendship, and its vivid
example is Mr Despui’s activity and the fact of being awarded Mkhitar
Gosh medal for his considerable contribution to the international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by RA President Serzh Sargsyan.

Hovik Abrahamyan emphasized the Argentinean guest’s contribution in
the sphere of the human rights protection and his contribution in the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the Argentinean Parliament
on November 29, 2006: Argentina was the second country in the South
American continent after Uruguay, which qualified the events of the
beginning of the 20th century Genocide. The Speaker of the Parliament
said that the visits of such figures would promote the activation of
the relations between the two countries. The NA Speaker noted that his
official visit to Argentina is scheduled in spring of the next year.

Doctor Leandro Despui thanked for warm reception. In his words the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide more approached the Armenian and
Argentinean peoples, the Armenian community is respected in Argentina,
and the visit of the head of the Armenian Parliament to that South
American country would be a serious impetus for the development of
bilateral relations.

The NA Speaker Hovik Abrahamyan considered important the cooperation
between the parliaments and the mutual visits of the delegations,
which would make possible to make closer the relations between the
two countries. He also expressed his gratitude for warm reception
being shown towards our compatriots by the Argentinean authorities.

To Leonard Despui’s conviction, the Armenian Genocide is an undeniable
fact, and its recognition is the problem not only of the Armenian
people, but also of the whole world.

Hovik Abrahamyan noted that the condemnation of the Armenian Genocide
is an opportunity to prevent the commitment of such crime towards
other people.

The interlocutors also touched the NK conflict, especially the right
of the nations’ self-determination, noting that the issue should be
solved on the basis of that principle, as well as non-use of force,
territorial integrity.

From: A. Papazian

US ARMENIANS SEEK UNEXPECTED VOTE ON ‘GENOCIDE’ BILL

Hurriyet

Dec 15 2010
Turkey

The largest and most influential U.S. Armenian group has launched
a grassroots campaign to urge the House of Representatives to pass
an “Armenian genocide” resolution before the term of the current
Congress expires.

Though Armenian groups have lobbied for such a resolution many times
before, typically ahead of April 24, the date when some countries
commemorate the alleged genocide, the Armenian National Committee of
America, or ANCA, is now hoping to push one through before the end
of the year, when one of its congressional champions will lose her
leadership post.

“There’s just a slight chance to pass the bill now, but the Armenians
are trying their chances,” one Washington-based analyst told the
Hurriyet Daily News & Economic Review. “This looks more like a year-end
fundraising effort.”

ANCA’s move came shortly after some Armenian-American celebrities
launched similar campaigns to urge the current House speaker, the
Democrat Nancy Pelosi, to bring the bill recognizing Armenian claims
of genocide to a House floor vote before stepping down.

When the new Congress takes office Jan. 3, Pelosi, a strong supporter
of the Armenian cause, will have to cede her post to the present
Republican minority leader, John Boehner. The Republicans regained
control of the House of Representatives, the lower chamber of Congress,
with a major victory in congressional midterm elections held Nov. 2.

ANCA said in a statement late Tuesday that the U.S. Armenian community
is “united in a common commitment to U.S. recognition of the Armenian
genocide, an end to Turkey’s denials and a truthful and just resolution
of this still-unpunished crime against the Armenian nation.”

Armenia claims up to 1.5 million Armenians were systematically killed
in 1915 under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey denies this,
saying that deaths were the result of civil strife that erupted when
Armenians took up arms for independence in eastern Anatolia.

“Tens of thousands of Armenian Americans have joined
genocide-prevention advocates in making the case for the adoption of
this human-rights measure,” ANCA said in its statement, calling on its
supporters to send messages to Pelosi and individual House members
urging approval of the resolution. “The Armenian-American response
has been unprecedented in size, scope and depth, bringing together
young and old, from first-generation families to fifth-generation
descendents of the first Armenian immigrants.”

ANCA also praised Armenian-American celebrities for their efforts to
generate support for the resolution. TV celebrity Kim Kardashian last
week sent a message to millions of her fans on the social-networking
website Twitter, asking Pelosi to schedule a vote on the bill. Rock
musician Serj Tankian made a similar move.

“We applaud Kim Kardashian, Serj Tankian and anti-genocide activists
from across the country for calling on Speaker Pelosi to schedule
a vote on the Armenian genocide resolution,” said Aram Hamparian,
ANCA’s executive director.

Turkey has repeatedly warned that its bilateral relationship with the
United States would deteriorate in a major and lasting way if the U.S.

administration or Congress adopts a measure recognizing the Armenian
genocide claims. The House Foreign Affairs Committee narrowly passed
the current measure in March, and the House leadership took the bill
to its agenda in September.

Despite unseating Pelosi from her leadership post, the Republican
takeover of the House will not necessarily bring relief to Turkey,
many analysts have warned. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a staunch supporter
of Israel, is expected to become the new chairwoman of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee after the new Congress opens. She and other
pro-Israeli lawmakers may seek measures against Turkey in response
to Ankara’s deteriorating ties with Tel Aviv, the analysts say.

The new Congress elected Nov. 2 will take office Jan. 3. Any
congressional sessions held between Nov. 2 and the new year are called
“lame duck” sessions. Under contemporary conditions, any meeting of
Congress that occurs between a congressional election in November
and the following Jan. 3 is a lame duck session. The significant
characteristic of such a duck session is that its participants are
the sitting members of the existing Congress, not those who will be
entitled to sit in the new Congress.

From: A. Papazian