Author: Andres-Papazian

ARMENIA: FRESH TENSIONS WITH TURKEY, THIS TIME, OVER A CROSS
by Marianna Grigoryan

EurasiaNet
Sept 14 2010
NY

A Turkish-government-sanctioned church service to be held on September
19 in the 10th century Armenian church of the Holy Cross in eastern
Turkey is rekindling a debate in Armenia about Ankara’s intentions
toward Yerevan.

Situated on an island in the middle of Lake Van, the Holy Cross Church
(known as Surb Khach in Armenian; Akdamar Kilise in Turkish) has not
hosted services for 95 years, since Ottoman Turkey’s 1915 slaughter of
hundreds of thousands of ethnic Armenians in eastern Turkey. In 2007,
the church, restored by the Turkish government, reopened as a museum.

Under an agreement from the Turkish Ministry for Culture and Tourism,
a mass will now be held once a year in the sanctuary.

But many Armenians say that the long-awaited service is shaping up
as a huge disappointment.

Their displeasure centers on a single, 200-kilogram cross — the
Armenian government and the Holy See of Etchmiadzin, seat of the
Armenian Apostolic Church, want the cross to be fixed atop the
church in time for the September 19 liturgy. Myunir Karaoghlu,
governor of Van, the Turkish region where the church is located,
has claimed meeting that deadline isn’t possible, due to a lack of
suitable equipment to place such a “very heavy” cross atop the church.

“I’m confused, I don’t know whether to attend the mass or not; a
liturgy without the cross makes no sense to me,” said 37-year-old
Yerevan accountant Narine Avetisian. “Have you ever seen a church
without a cross? It’s a disgrace.”

Earlier this year, Armenian travel agencies promoted package tours
for attending the mass, which was also expected to attract a large
number of diaspora Armenians. That all ended after reports surfaced
this month about Governor Karoghlu’s alleged statement concerning the
cross to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Archbishop Aram Ateshian,
who represents the Armenian Apostolic Church in Istanbul.

The Armenian government subsequently rebuked Turkey for its stance,
and dismissed the liturgy as an alleged theatrical show staged to
make Turkey seem tolerant to the outside world.

The cross controversy may have become part of a larger issue involving
Armenia and Turkey: reconciliation attempts between the long-time
enemies came to a halt this spring over emotional divisions on a range
of issues. [For background see the EurasiaNet.org archive]. Since then,
Armenian media outlets have zeroed in on negative news coverage about
Turkey; many travel agencies, in turn, have dropped tours to Turkey,
a longtime popular summer destination for Armenians. [For details,
see the EurasiaNet.org archive].

One Turkish studies expert in Yerevan, though, seconds the government’s
opinion of the mass. “[A]ll the facilities to host Armenian pilgrims
are being prepared to avoid any problems, and, in this context, the
refusal to place the cross on the church, allegedly due to technical
reasons, is not serious,” said Yerevan State University Professor
Ruben Melkonian. “It appears that a huge country like Turkey cannot
raise a cross weighing only 200 kilograms.”

The “heavy cross” statement also prompted the Holy See of Etchmiadzin
to reconsider sending representatives to the mass; Etchmiadzin
reportedly sent the cross for the church to the Armenian Patriarchate
in Constantinople “many years ago.” It claims that it thought the cross
would be in place a week before the mass. In a September 5 statement,
the Holy See said that it considers the Turkish reason for the delay
to be “without cause.”

The Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople will, however, still take
part in the liturgy.

Melkonian cautions that “the cross may be placed on the [church]
dome at the last moment.”

“And what will Etchmiadzin do in this case? Will [its representatives]
attend [the mass]?” Melkonian asked. “It appears that we’re letting
Turkey dictate the rules of the game.”

The Armenian press largely ignored the August 15 mass held in the
Greek Orthodox monastery of Sumela in northeastern Turkey; the event,
widely attended by Orthodox faithful from throughout Eastern Europe
and Russia, took place without controversy. [For background see the
EurasiaNet.org archive].

Some Armenians suggest that emphasis on the event should fall on mass
itself, not on whether or not it comes with a cross on top. “The
church was orphaned for so many years and now we have a chance to
go there and to participate in a mass. Why should we not go? Because
the church has no head?” asked 46-year-old athlete Janik Avanesian.

Whether the church comes with a cross or not, Eduard Sharmazanov,
the spokesperson for the governing Republican Party of Armenia,
maintained that Armenians should not participate in the mass, long
awaited though it may be. “I don’t think this is the way to tolerance
and solidarity of civilizations,” commented Sharmazanov.

Editor’s note: Marianna Grigoryan is a freelance reporter based
in Yerevan.

From: A. Papazian

ARP NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN AKHTAMAR CHURCH CEREMONY

Panorama
Sept 14 2010
Armenia

If official Yerevan politicized the events regarding St. Cross Church
of Akhtamar, Turkey would reach its goal, Armenian Republican Party
(ARP) MP Hovhannes Sahakyan told reporters today. According to him,
both the reconstruction of the church and the liturgy to be held
there is merely a Turkish show.

He thinks that the local Armenian clergymen should also refuse to
participate in the ceremony providing the Turkish leadership fails
to place a cross atop the church.

The Republican deputy urged everyone not to attend the ceremony and
assured that no Republicans are intent to participate in the “show.”

From: A. Papazian

NO CHANGES WITHIN RPA

news.am
Sept 14 2010
Armenia

No changes are under way within the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA).

The rumors that a list of candidates for the 2012 parliamentary
elections is being discussed are false, the Hovhanes Sahakyan, an MP
of the RPA, told reporters on September 14.

“There are no disagreements within the RPA. No ticket is on the
agenda. The RPA will discuss the issue pursuant to decisions by the
President and the RPA Council,” Sahakyan said.

As to the rumors about disagreements between the coalition parties,
he pointed out that “we have normal, friendly and working relations
with our partners.”

Yesterday, a number of RPA members both confirmed and refuted the
rumors that the party is discussing a list of candidates to run for
Parliament in 2012. RA Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan is rumored
likely to top the list.

From: A. Papazian

MEMBER OF SLOVAK PARLIAMENT: RETURN OF MOUNT ARARAT TO ARMENIA WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED STEP FOR RISE OF TURKEY’S AUTHORITY

Panorama
Sept 14 2010
Armenia

“Turkey’s relations with Armenia are a litmus paper for understanding
Turkey’s new foreign policy. Turkey has a population of 70 million,
Armenia – 3 million. Parliamentary system is established in both
countries, with government appointed through election, besides,
Turkey is a member of NATO, and this organization’s doctrine is based
on democracy and humanism.

However, barbed wire fences the Armenian-Turkish border blocking
all ways for Armenia,” member of Slovak parliament, founder of the
Christian Democratic Movement (KDH) Frantisek Miklosko said in his
speech at the forum under the title “New Foreign Policy of Turkey”
held on September 10 in Poland. The text of the speech was provided
by the ARF press office.

F. Miklosko, particularly, said: “There is no ideological antagonism
between Armenia and Turkey, nevertheless, Turkey keeps transport and
economic, political blockade of Armenia.

Turkey cannot deny the fact of the Armenian Genocide of 1915, since
the Armenians were killed in their own land only because they were
Armenian.

I want to speak about a symbolic, yet a very important issue – Biblical
Mount Ararat. It is a matter of historical Christian heritage for
Armenia. Doesn’t modern Turkey consider possible to return Mount
Ararat to Armenia? It would be an unprecedented step not only for
future peaceful coexistence but also for rise of Turkey’s authority
in the world.”

From: A. Papazian

TURKISH AUTHORITIES DID NOT DO ENOUGH TO PROTECT RIGHTS OF MURDERED JOURNALIST, SAYS EUROPEAN COURT
by Adam Wagner

UK Human Rights Blog

Sept 14 2010

Dink v Turkey (Applications no. 2668/07, 6102/08, 30079/08, 7072/09
and 7124/09) – This summary is based on the European Court of Human
Rights press release.

In the case of Dink v. Turkey the European Court of Human Rights
concluded that the authorities failed in their duty to protect the
life and freedom of expression of the journalist Firat (Hrant) Dink,
a prominent member of the Armenian minority in Turkey who was murdered
in 2007.

Dink was a Turkish journalist of Armenian origin, and the publication
director and editor-in-chief of Agos, a Turkish-Armenian weekly
newspaper.

Between November 2003 and February 2004 Fırat Dink published eight
articles in Agos in which he expressed his views on the identity of
Turkish citizens of Armenian origin. In particular, in the sixth and
seventh articles of the series, he wrote that Armenians’ obsession
with having their status as victims of genocide recognised had become
their raison d’être, that this need on their part was treated with
indifference by Turkish people and that this explained why the traumas
suffered by the Armenians remained a live issue. In his view, the
Turkish element in Armenian identity was both a poison and an antidote.

On 19 January 2007 Fırat Dink was killed by three bullets to the head.

The suspected perpetrator was arrested in Samsun (Turkey). In April
2007 the Istanbul public prosecutor’s office instituted criminal
proceedings against 18 accused. The proceedings are still pending.

Relying in particular on Article 2, the applicants other than Fırat
Dink complained that the State had failed in its obligation to protect
the life of Fırat Dink. Under the same provision, they alleged that
the criminal proceedings brought against the State agents concerned
for failing to protect the journalist’s life had been ineffective. On
the latter point they also relied on Article 13. Under Article 10 in
particular, they further alleged that the fact that Fırat Dink had
been found guilty of denigrating Turkish identity had infringed his
freedom of expression and made him a target for nationalist extremists.

Violation of Article 2 (right to life)

The Court took the view that the Turkish security forces could
reasonably be considered to have been aware of the intense hostility
towards Fırat Dink in nationalist circles. The investigations
carried out by the Istanbul public prosecutor’s office and the Interior
Ministry investigators had highlighted the fact that the police in both
Trabzon and Istanbul, and the Trabzon gendarmerie, had been informed
of the likelihood of an assassination attempt and even of the identity
of the suspected instigators. In view of the circumstances, the threat
of an assassination could be said to have been real and imminent.

There had also been a breach of Article 2 (in its “procedural aspect”),
as no effective investigation had been carried out into the failures
which occurred in protecting the life of Fırat Dink.

Violation of Article 10 (right of freedom of expression)

The Court shared the view of Principal State Counsel at the Court
of Cassation that an analysis of the full series of articles in
which Fırat Dink used the impugned expression showed clearly that
what he described as “poison” had not been “Turkish blood”, as held
by the Court of Cassation, but the “perception of Turkish people”
by Armenians and the obsessive nature of the Armenian diaspora’s
campaign to have Turkey recognise the events of 1915 as genocide.

After analysing the manner in which the Court of Cassation had
interpreted and given practical expression to the notion of Turkish
identity, the Court concluded that, in reality, it had indirectly
punished Fırat Dink for criticising the State institutions’ denial
of the view that the events of 1915 amounted to genocide.

The Court reiterated that Article 10 of the Convention prohibited
restrictions on freedom of expression in the sphere of political
debate and issues of public interest, and that the limits of
acceptable criticism were wider for the Government than for a private
individual. It further observed that the author had been writing in
his capacity as a journalist on an issue of public concern. Lastly,
it reiterated that it was an integral part of freedom of expression
to seek historical truth. The Court therefore concluded that Fırat
Dink’s conviction for denigrating Turkish identity had not answered
any “pressing social need”.

The Court also stressed that States were required to create a
favourable environment for participation in public debate by all
the persons concerned, enabling them to express their opinions
and ideas without fear. In a case like the present one, the State
must not just refrain from any interference with the individual’s
freedom of expression, but was also under a “positive obligation”
to protect his or her right to freedom of expression against attack,
including by private individuals. In view of its findings concerning
the authorities’ failure to protect Fırat Dink against the attack
by members of an extreme nationalist group and concerning the guilty
verdict handed down in the absence of a “pressing social need”, the
Court concluded that Turkey’s “positive obligations” with regard to
Fırat Dink’s freedom of expression had not been complied with.

There had therefore been a violation of Article 10.

Damages

The Court held, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, that Turkey was
to pay 100,000 euros (EUR) jointly to Fırat Dink’s wife and children
and EUR 5,000 to his brother. It was also to pay EUR 28,595 to the
applicants jointly for costs and expenses.

From: A. Papazian

AZERBAIJANI DEFENSE MINISTER RECEIVES BRITISH OFFICIAL
M.Aliyev

Trend
Sept 14 2010
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan’s Defense Minister Colonel, General Safar Abiyev, has
received adviser to the UK Foreign Ministry and the International
Security Advisory Board representative Lieutenant General Gary Johnson
(rtd.), the ministry has reported.

During the meeting the officials discussed the military-political
situation in the region and exchanged views on the problems caused
by the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

The meeting was attended by Caroline Brown, Ambassador of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to Azerbaijan.

From: A. Papazian

EUROPEAN COURT FINDS TURKISH STATE LIABLE IN MURDER OF JOURNALIST

Monsters and Critics.com
Sept 14 2010

Istanbul – The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) said Tuesday it
has ruled that the Turkish state failed to protect the life of Hrant
Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist who was murdered in early 2007.

In a statement released in Strasbourg, the court also said it found
that the Turkish state had failed to protect Dink’s freedom of
expression prior to his murder.

Dink had initially filed a case with the ECHR himself, after he was
convicted of ‘insulting Turkishness’ for a column he wrote in Agos,
the Armenian-Turkish newspaper he edited.

After his murder, the journalist’s family launched another case before
the court, accusing Turkish authorities of taking insufficient measures
to protect Dink’s life.

The two cases were eventually merged. In its ruling, the court
sentenced the Turkish state to pay 105,000 euros (135,000 dollars)
to Dink’s family in compensation and an extra 28,595 euros to the
court for expenditures.

The outspoken Dink was shot three times in the head on the sidewalk
in front of Agos in January 2007. His accused murderer, Ogun Samast,
was 17 years old at the time of the shooting. Samast is currently on
trial for the murder.

The Turkish state has faced criticism that it failed to do enough
to protect Dink, despite repeated threats to his life by ultra
nationalists. There have also been questions about whether certain
members of Turkey’s police force played a role in the incident.

Following Samast’s arrest, for instance, pictures were leaked to the
press showing members of the police force proudly posing with the
accused murderer.

‘This decision should not be the end of the story,’ Emma Sinclair-
Webb, a Turkey researcher for Human Rights Watch, told the German
Press Agency dpa.

‘The authorities and the court should view this as a push to get to the
bottom of this case, find out who the murderers were and uncover any
possible collusion by elements of the state in the killing,’ she added.

From: A. Papazian

AZERBAIJAN WILL NEVER DEFEAT NAGORNO-KARABAKH, INTERNATIONAL EXPERT SAYS

news.am
Sept 14 2010
Armenia

Incidents on the line of contact between Nagorno-Karabakh and
Azerbaijan will go on Thomas de Waal, a British journalist, writer and
an expert on the Caucasus, said in an interview with Voice of America.

He pointed out the alarming fact that in some points the sides’
positions are just 40 meters away from each other. The expert also
pointed out a major difference between the militant rhetoric of the
Azeri President and of the Azeri Minister of Defense. The President
is issuing threats, while the minister is joking, Thomas de Waal said.

According to him, the reason is that the statements by Alham Aliev
and Safar Abiev are intended for different audiences. Specifically,
the reason of Aliev’s threats is the need for political dividends.

Thomas de Waal believes that Azerbaijan cannot gain victory in
case of war, evidence thereof is various surveys. He explains it
by Nagorno-Karabakh’s geographical location and the Armenian army’s
power. Besides modern arms, a victory requires relying on the army,
which Azerbaijan cannot do now, he said. Should Azerbaijan unleash
war, it will claim the lives of thousands of Azerbaijani soldiers,
Thomas de Waal said.

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIAN ECONOMY IN NEED OF DIVERSIFICATION
By Messenger Staff

The Messenger
Sept 14 2010
Georgia

The Armenian government plans to hold debates on economic issues
jointly with ministers and parliament members, Armenia’s Economic
Minister, Nerses Eritsian, stated on September 10. Such debates
will be examined by the Armenian President and thus the country’s
future development will be determined for the next 20 years. Minister
Eritsian stated as well in his appearance in front of the students that
Armenia’s economy needed serious diversification. According to him,
the government plans to develop its industrial policy and attract
serious foreign investment. The Minister also expressed his opinion
that Armenia has certain geo-political as well as regional limits
which create additional challenges for the country’s economy. Eritsian
stated that it is necessary for the country’s development to establish
a healthy, compatible and appropriate environment to facilitate
development for small and medium sized businesses. The country should
also develop its export market, thinks Ricardo Housman, director
of the Harvard International Development Institute Center. Housman
thinks that this could be achieved by developing tourism information
technologies and agriculture. He added that, in general, Armenia
products need to be made more attractive.

From: A. Papazian

BABUKHANYAN: AZERBAIJAN KEEPS FASCIST POLICY

Aysor
Sept 14 2010
Armenia

The Armenian party should tell Minsk Group co-chairs that we are
abandoning the talks until Azerbaijan stops its Racial and Fascist
policy, “Constitutional Law” Union leader Hayk Babukhanyan told a
press conference.

According to Babukhanyan, Armenia should suspend the negotiations
until the Azerbaijani authorities are ready for a civilized dialogue.

From: A. Papazian