Hrant Dink’s Lessons And Spirit Are Alive

HRANT DINK’S LESSONS AND SPIRIT ARE ALIVE

PanARMENIAN.Net
27.02.2007 13:09 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "Lessons and spirit of slain Hrant Dink, the
editor-in-chief of Armenian-Turkish "Agos" weekly, are alive, Aleida
Assman of Konstanz University in Germany said during "From the Burden
of the Past to Societal Peace and Democracy" international conference
at Bilgi University in Istanbul. "We still hear his voice, and aim
for his beliefs to continue to exist," she told.

Drawing attention to the "We are all Armenian" slogan carried by
those attending Hrant Dink’s funeral in Istanbul, Assman said that
"synagogues, homes and goods belonging to the Jewish minority were
ransacked in Germany in 1938. If we had been able to say, "We are all
Jewish," would Hitler have been able to do this?", Hurriyet reports.

The Congress Has To Affirm The Fact Of Violation Of International La

THE CONGRESS HAS TO AFFIRM THE FACT OF VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW BY TURKEY
By Ara Papian

AZG Armenian Daily
28/02/2007

US Congress and Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award to Armenia

Recently the issue of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by
the United States of America has been extensively illustrated by the
Armenian and international mass media. Turkey as ever, is trying
to argue the right of foreign states to interfere its history and
inner affairs.

In this state of things a rather important thing has slipped away from
our attention – USA’s Constitutional right of interfering international
affairs, judging international law violations and punishing the guilty
side. Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 10 of the US Constitution says:
þþThe Congress shall have power … to define and punish …offenses
against the law of nations."

Therefore, each member of the Congress may raise such a question:
is not Turkey’s refusal to fulfill the Arbitral Award on the
Turkish-Armenian Border by Woodrow Wilson (22 November, 1922) a
violation f international law? If so, why do not the United States
take measures to bring the lawbreaker to responsibility?

The Congress has to affirm the fact of violation of international
law by Turkey for two main reasons.

First, the principle of precedents, adopted by the Senate.

Already in 1927 the Senate expressed a firm and certain position on
the Wilson’s Arbitral Award. Thus on January 18 the Senate refused
to endorse the American-Turkish agreement (signed August 6, 1923 )
and to accept the present Turkish republic [1].

Therefore the USA-Turkey relations remain uncertain by now [2]. Three
reasons of declining the agreement were brought by the Senate, of
which the first was the following: "Turkey failed to provide for
the fulfillment of the Wilson award to Armenia" [3]. The agreement
remained pending at the Senate until 1934, when called back to the
President’s cabinet by the request of Franklin Roosevelt [4]. Turkey
also never completed the process of endorsement of that agreement [5].

Second, the terms of the Democrat Party Platform.

1924-1928 party platform stated the necessity of "Fulfillment of
President Wilson’s arbitral award respecting Armenia". The 1928-32
platform said: "We favor the most earnest efforts on the part of the
United States to secure the fulfillment of the promises and engagements
made during and following the World War by the United States and the
allied powers to Armenia and her people" [6].

Taking into consideration that in the both cambers of the US Congress
the majority at present belongs to Democrats, it seems quite possible
that the Senate, according to the US Constitution will define Turkey’s
offences against the law of nations, neglecting the arbitral award
and urge the executive branch to take measures of punishment.

1. Unperfected Treaties of the United States of America, 1776-1976,
edited and annotated by Christian L. Wiktor, Volume 6, 1919-1925,
New York, 1984, p.

421. Leland J. Gordon, Turkish-American Political Relations, The
American Political Science Review, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Aug., 1928), p. 721.

2. Roger R. Trask, The United States Response to Turkish Nationalism
and Reform 1914-1939, The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis,
1971, p. 36)

3. Lausanne Treaty is Defeated, the Davenport Democrat, January 19,
1927, p.

4. Roger R. Trask, The United States Response to Turkish Nationalism
and Reform 1914-1939, The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis,
1971, p. 48)

5. Unperfected Treaties of the United States of America, 1776-1976,
edited and annotated by Christian L. Wiktor, Volume 6, 1919-1925,
New York, 1984, p. 421.

6. National Party Platforms, 1840-1968, (completed by Kirk Porter
and Donald Johnson), Urbana, Chicago, London, 1972, p. 277.

–Boundary_(ID_FoZKpXPOzXhRrN69cF8Ohw)–

Budapest court upholds life sentence for Azerbaijani officer

Agence France Presse — English
February 22, 2007 Thursday 2:15 PM GMT

Budapest court upholds life sentence for Azerbaijani officer

A Budapest court upheld a life sentence on Thursday against an
Azerbaijani military officer convicted of murdering an Armenian
lieutenant in Hungary in 2004, court spokesman Gyorgy Felkai told
AFP.

The murder had inflamed simmering ethnic tensions between Azerbaijan
and Armenia, two former Soviet republics fighting for control over
the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh.

"The appellate court upheld the life sentence handed down by the
first instance," Felkai said Thursday.

Ramil Safarov, an Azerbaijani army lieutenant, used an axe to hack
Armenian lieutenant Gurgen Markarian to death in his sleep in the
dormitories of a NATO training centre in Budapest in 2004.

The two officers were enrolled in an English-language course in the
Hungarian capital as part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s
Partnership for Peace programme, of which both Armenia and Azerbaijan
are members.

Safarov was also found guilty of planning the murder of another
Armenian, which he did not carry out.

He will be eligible for parole in 30 years.

Armenia had attributed the murder to "anti-Armenian hysteria" fanned
by the Baku government, while Azerbaijani officials countered that
the killer was himself a refugee from the conflict with Armenia and
that the victim had taunted him over the conflict.

Armenia and Azerbaijan fought a six-year war over Karabakh that
claimed around 25,000 lives and displaced hundreds of thousands of
people.

It ended in a tense ceasefire in 1994 with Armenian forces in control
of most of the enclave and seven surrounding regions, but Karabakh’s
status remains unresolved and tensions are still at boiling point.

Joint Discussion Of The Karabakh Conflict

JOINT DISCUSSION OF THE KARABAKH CONFLICT

armradio.am
22.02.2007 17:00

"The communities of Nagorno Karabakh can jointly discuss the ways
of resolution of the conflict. The Azerbaijani community proposed
to hold such meeting in the city of Shoushi," Head of the so called
Azeri community of Nagorno Karabakh Nizami Bakhmanov told RIA Novosti.

He said that "the Azerbaijani side positively assesses the suggestion
of the EU Special Envoy for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby to hold
discussions between the communities of the region on ways of the
conflict resolution."

According to Bakhmanov, "such a meeting can take place only in
Shoushi." "If these negotiations yield a positive result, the Azeri
community is ready to hold this kind of meetings with mediation of
international organizations," he noted. Bakhmanov also informed that
"the work in this direction is already under way and Peter Semneby will
discuss the question during the visits to Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh.

There Is Nothing Extraordinary About OYP Vice-Chairman’s Leaving Par

THERE IS NOTHING EXTRAORDINARY ABOUT OYP VICE-CHAIRMAN’S LEAVING PARTY, PARTY CHAIRMAN SAYS

Noyan Tapan
Feb 22 2007

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 22, NOYAN TAPAN. The rumors on Orinats Yerkir
(Country of Law) Vice-Chairman Gagik Aslanian’s intention to
leave the party do not correspond to reality. OYP Chairman Artur
Baghdasarian declared this at the February 22 press conference. As
regards party’s another Vice-Chairman Gagik Mkheyan’s leaving the
party, in A. Baghdasarian’s words, there is nothing extraordinary
about it. He said that G. Mkheyan had long stopped working actively
in the party, which he publicly confessed. OYP Chairman considered as
"decency" the fact that G. Mkheyan elected as a deputy by the party’s
list remained in the faction until the expiration of the powers of
current parliament. In A. Baghdasarian’s words, soon OYP and another
political forces will publish their proportional lists and it is not
excluded that parties not included in the lists will leave the party.

Delegation Meets Archbishop And Ayatollah In Iran

DELEGATION MEETS ARCHBISHOP AND AYATOLLAH IN IRAN
Mark Beach

Mennonite Central Committee
Feb 21 2007

TEHRAN, Iran – On the first day after their arrival in Iran, a
delegation of U.S. religious leaders met separately with Tehran
Friday prayer leader Mohammad Emami Kashani and the Archbishop of
the Armenian Orthodox Church in Tehran.

In introductory remarks to both leaders, delegation co-leader
Ron Flaming of the Mennonite Central Committee explained that the
delegation of Christian leaders feels a calling to visit Iran at a
time of great tension between the two nations. He made clear that
the delegation believes that this tension is not what God intended.

Flaming said the delegation came to meet with the Iranians to engage
in dialogue and hear suggestions on how people in Iran and the U.S.
can help reduce the tension.

In an effort to help the group understand the relationship of
minorities in Iran, Archbishop Sebu Sarkissian said that although
the Armenians living in Iran are a minority faith group, they view
themselves as full Iranians. In fact, he added, the Armenian church
in Iran is an indigenous community.

He said that religious leaders in the U.S. and Iran have to build
trust between each other. "This is not an easy task," he said.

The Ayatollah began his address to the delegation by revealing that
the Holy Kor’an says Christianity is mentioned as the closest religion
to Islam. He explained that the two religions are not in conflict
and that both want peace, equality and justice.

In a question and answer period with the delegates, the Ayatollah
confirmed that the Grand Ayatollahs of Iran have issued a "fatwa"
against the development and use of nuclear weapons and all weapons
of mass destruction. He said it is forbidden in Islam.

When asked why harsh language is used against the United States in
the Friday prayers that he sometimes leads-prayers broadcast across
the country- he replied "What you mention is not against the American
people. Our objection is to statements of the American government."

On his way to evening prayers, the Imam’s final statement to the
delegation was, "Please consider Iran as your second home for
Americans."

The 13-member U.S. group represents church members from the Mennonite,
Quaker, Episcopal, Catholic and United Methodist churches.

The group is spending one-week in Iran meeting with religious and
political leaders in the country.

"Iravounk" Will Not Be Published Tomorrow

"IRAVOUNK" WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED TOMORROW

A1+
[07:41 pm] 19 February, 2007

Tomorrow a protest action will be held in the office of Constitutional
Right Union. Newspaper "Iravounk" will not be published. The reason,
according to CRU President Hayk Baboukhanyan, is the threats to the
party and the editorial office.

"People call us on behalf of Hrant Khachatryan and threaten
us. Besides, we know what an attack on the party means. The same
people had organized an attack ten days ago which was prevented thanks
to our efforts. Our workers are afraid to go home in the evening",
announced Hayk Baboukhanyan and added that they have sent the woman
workers home as they cannot provide their security. He also mentioned
that their bank account has been blocked.

The CRU President claimed that the doors of the office will be
closed for Hrant Khachatryan. Electing leader of the party by court
is unacceptable for Baboukhanyan.

Nevertheless, Hayk Baboukhanyan has a suggestion for Hrant
Khachatryan. He offers him to participate in the 18th conference of
the party and vote together with the members of the party.

Let us remind you that by the decision of the Court the results of
the 17th conference of the CRU have been canceled.

Armenia’s Caucus Replenished In US Congress

ARMENIA’S CAUCUS REPLENISHED IN US CONGRESS

Arka News Agency, Armenia
Feb 19 2007

YEREVAN, February 19. /ARKA/. Armenia’s support group in the
US Congress was replenished with another member of the House of
Representatives. The Armenian Assembly of America reported that
Representative Zack Space (D-OH) has joined the Congressional Caucus on
Armenian Issues, bringing the total Caucus membership to 147 members.

"There are so many critical issues facing the Armenian-American
community, from reaffirmation of the Armenian Genocide to securing
important technical and development funding for the Republic of
Armenia. We are looking forward to working with Congressman Space
to address these important matters," said AAA Executive Director
Bryan Ardouny.

The Armenian Caucus was formed in 1995 to provide a bipartisan forum
for legislators to discuss how the United States can better assist
the peoples of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

Reconstruction of villages of RA & Artsakh to be discussed in Paris

DeFacto Agency, Armenia
Feb 15 2007

PROGRAM ON RECONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGES OF RA AND ARTSAKH TO BE
DISCUSSED IN PARIS

February 15 Hayastan All-Armenian Fund Executive Director Naira
Melkoumian will leave for Paris on a three-day working visit.
According to the information DE FACTO got at the Fund’s Public
Relations Department, February 15 Naira Melkoumian will meet with the
representatives of a number of local offices of Hayastan All-Armenian
Fund within the frames of the visit.
February 16-17 Fund Executive Director will meet with the
representatives of various benevolent organizations. In the course of
the meeting the parties will consider the details, mechanisms of
implementation and financial part of the program on reconstruction
and development of the villages of Armenia and Artsakh.

To The Shores Of Tripoli

TO THE SHORES OF TRIPOLI
By Judith Miller

BOOKS
URL:
February 14, 2007

It seems prophetic that America’s first foray into the Middle East
involved a bribe, and ended, ignominiously, in failure.

Seeking to rescue Americans taken hostage by Barbary pirates, John
Lamb, a Connecticut businessman who had once traded mules in the
Mediterranean but had no diplomatic experience, arrived in Algiers in
1785 with authorization from Congress to bribe the reigning potentate,
Hassan Dey. But instead of releasing the hostages, the dey demanded
additional ransom that included a portrait of George Washington,
whom he professed to admire.

The fiasco did not stop the United States from paying bribes to
secure treaties with other Barbary states, writes Michael Oren, in
his compelling new book on America’s involvement in the Middle East,
"Power, Faith, and Fantasy" (Norton, 604 pages, $35).

But such ignominious episodes prompted Thomas Jefferson, who had
helped negotiate a $20,000 "gift" to the king of Morocco, to argue
that his fellow Americans preferred "confrontation with Barbary
to blackmail." Ultimately, Mr. Oren observes, Jefferson used the
humiliation of continuing Barbary seizures of American cargo and
citizens to persuade a reluctant Congress to finance the nation’s
first Navy.

America’s pragmatic use of diplomacy and force to achieve its
objectives in the Middle East would become a hallmark of its approach
to the region. The Middle East, Mr. Oren argues persuasively,
was seminal in shaping American identity — from the drafting of a
constitution that, unlike the ineffectual Articles of Confederation,
enabled the fledging state to defend its own borders and economic
interests overseas, to the lyrics of "The Star Spangled Banner."

America, in turn, also helped shape Middle Eastern identity and
aspirations. The now common term for the region once known as the
Orient, or the Near East, Mr. Oren notes in one of his many asides,
was coined by an American admiral in 1902.

The Middle East was a series of "firsts" for America: the authorization
of its first police action Jefferson’s order to his new Navy in 1801
to sink, burn, and destroy any pirate ship that threatened American
vessels — and that same year, the first time America found itself
the target of a formally declared war — by the pasha in Tripoli.

>From the outset, Mr. Oren writes, the relationship was fraught with
tension leavened by cultural curiosity and fantasies about the exotic
Orient and more critically, by economic and religious opportunity.

Americans always considered themselves morally superior to the Arabs,
a conception that "landed with the Pilgrims at Plymouth," he asserts.

American myths about Islam and the Muslims who practiced it, the
"ultimate other," he calls them, were as deep-seated as they were
occasionally inconsistent. The image of the "liberty-loving nomad,"
riding alone in the desert, "unencumbered by governments or borders"–
a Middle Eastern version of the colonial pioneers, and later the
cowboy — clashed with Americans’ perception of the region as backward,
brutal, corrupt, obsessed with hierarchy, and often savage enforcement
of tribal customs. While Americans fantasized about twisting alleys,
exotic bazaars, erotic belly dancers, and lustful Bedouin sheiks
at world fairs, in books and newspapers, and later in film, many
early American visitors to the region — even Southern slaveowners–
could not help but deplore the treatment of Muslim women, an enduring
challenge for the region. Before the Civil War, American missionaries
and other abolitionists — Horace Mann, Charles Wells Brown, and
Theodore Parker, among them — cited the barbarity of Middle Eastern
slavery in demanding that American blacks be freed.

Mr. Oren’s sweeping, highly textured history of the 230-year
interaction between America and the Middle East told me much I did
not know. I was unaware of the fact, for instance, that George Bush,
a biblical scholar and professor of Hebrew at New York University
— and a forebear of the two presidents — wrote an influential
treatise in 1844 on the need for Jews to recreate their ancient
state in Palestine. Nor did I know that one of President Lincoln’s
assassins was caught after escaping to Egypt, or that the Statue
of Liberty’s creator initially conceived of his work as an Egyptian
peasant woman who would hold the torch of liberty at the entrance of
the Suez Canal. How many Americans know that veterans of both sides
of the American Civil War wound up advising military campaigns for
the Egyptian khedive in Sudan and what was then Abyssinia? Or that
early diplomatic envoys to the region, unlike those sent after the
1920s when the State Department developed its professional corps of
Arabists, tended to be Jews?

Mr. Oren’s work is prodigious, drawing upon hundreds of original
and archival sources — letters, memoirs, books and government
documents, which he skillfully weaves into a finely drawn narrative
that alternates among cultural, political, and economic interactions.

One of the book’s major contributions is Mr. Oren’s meticulous
scholarship on the influence of American missionaries in the Middle
East and the extraordinary impact they had not only on the region,
but in Washington.

Missionaries — exemplars of "the American spirit at its best,"
as Henry Morgenthau, an adviser to President Wilson and ambassador
to Turkey, praised them — printed Bibles in Arabic, opened hundreds
of medical clinics, schools, and what ultimately became three of the
region’s most prestigious universities. Preaching not only Christian
precepts but what Morgenthau called the "gospel of Americanism,"
missionaries founded many of the institutions that helped give birth
to Arab nationalism.

The impact that other powers had achieved through war and plunder,
Mr. Oren argues, Americans secured largely through philanthropy and
religiously inspired educational missions. Such work had at least
one crucial economic payoff for America: Mr. Oren notes that Saudi
Arabia’s King ibn Saud offered oil exploration rights to American,
rather than British prospectors partly because he was impressed by
the missionary doctors’ reputation for honesty and good works.

But the missionaries failed in their main objective: spiritual
salvation. Henry Jessup, the "doyen of American evangelists," lamented
that despite the creation of more than 100 churches and the presence
of over 200 missionaries throughout the Ottoman Empire, the number
of converts from Islam remained "negligible."

As later generations of Americans would eventually discover, Islam’s
hold over the Arabs, Turks, and Persians repeatedly frustrated
the missionaries, partly because of their intense disdain for the
religion. Mr. Oren convincingly shows that antipathy toward Islam
was both profound and widespread in early America — echoes of which
are apparent today. Sarah Haight, a Long Island woman who toured the
Middle East in the 1830s, was typical in deploring the "Mohammedanism"
that "pulls down … every country in which it predominates." Walter
Colton, a liberal editor and naval chaplain, concluded in 1836 that
"Islamism" was "the grave of inspired truth and liberty."

The flip side of the early missionaries’ hostility toward Islam was
their enthusiastic embrace of the restoration of the Jews in the
Holy Land. Far more than early American Jews, who were fearful of
being labeled un-American, Christian missionaries embraced the goal
of returning Jews to Zion.

But Mr. Oren, an American-born Israeli scholar, is honest about what
motivated some of them. Like their modern evangelical counterparts
whose reverberations are heard in the words of the memorable figures
he describes in this often riveting book, "love for the Jewish people"
was often not an end in itself, but rather, a "means for hastening
Christ’s return."

Perhaps because Mr. Oren is an Israeli, and therefore keenly aware
that his every line is likely to be scrutinized by Muslims and Jews
alike for pro-Israeli sympathies or anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias,
he strives to be detached from the historic hatreds and resentments
that have long roiled the region, not to mention American departments
of Middle Eastern studies.

Only occasionally do strong feelings arise. For example, in his
description of the Armenian "holocaust" at the hands of the Turks.

His recounting of the slaughter is harrowing, but he barely mentions
the larger historical context — such as Russia’s repeated invasions
of Turkey in the name of liberating Armenian and other Ottoman
Christians. While such factors can never justify massacres, they help
explain why they occurred.

For the most part, Mr. Oren remains neutral in his discussion of the
Jewish and Arab claims to Palestine and other bitter disputes. At
times, the reader yearns for slightly more passion and/or outrage —
and a tad more skepticism — from this careful scholar.

While America, unlike its European counterparts, never sought to
colonize the region, Mr. Oren seems to accept naïvely the alleged
purity of American motives and actions in the region.

Nor is it always clear what Mr. Oren means in his references to the
importance of "faith" in shaping political views about the region.

Yes, President Eisenhower used the word 14 times in his first inaugural
address, but as even Mr. Oren acknowledges, in the most secular
way. "For the new president," he writes, faith meant "confidence in
America’s ability to protect freedom worldwide" while "respecting the
‘special heritage of each nation.’"

Only in his discussion of the rise of Islamism in the last 50 pages
of the book and in his epilogue does Mr. Oren openly disclose his
personal conclusions about America’s protracted engagement in the
Middle East. Yes, he writes, successive administrations have backed
oppressive regimes that advanced American interests and conspired to
overthrow popular leaders. And American oil companies have pumped
billions of barrels of Arabian oil "not for the betterment of the
indigenous population but for their own enrichment."

Yet for all of its shortcomings, he concludes, America has been
"unrivaled in introducing modern education and health care to the
region, in extending emergency relief and building infrastructure,
in obtaining the freedom of colonized nations, and in attempting to
achieve security and peace."

On balance, he asserts, America has brought "more beneficence than
avarice to the Middle East and caused significantly less harm than
good." But this optimistic grace note is contradicted by much of what
he outlines in this impressive book. For as his own scholarship has
shown, the Middle East has repeatedly demonstrated an infuriating
ability to surprise, confound, and ultimately frustrate usually
self-interested and often insensitive American plans and intentions.

Ms. Miller, a journalist living in NewYork, is the author of "God
Has Ninety Nine Names: Reporting from a Militant Middle East" (Simon
& Schuster).

–Boundary_(ID_2EvGXz64KVYdNxm4N7m/dw) —

http://www.nysun.com/article/48622