Author: Chilingarian Babken

ISSUES OF ARMENIAN-POLISH COOPERATION DISCUSSED

armradio.am
01.10.2008 16:15

Secretary of the National Security council Arthur Baghdasaryan
received the Deputy Foreign Minister of Poland Andrzej Kremer and
his delegation. During the meeting the parties discussed issues
of Armenian-Polish cooperation in the fields of politics and
security. Mr. Kremer conveyed the greetings of the Secretary of
the national Security Council of Poland and an invitation to visit
his country.

At the request of the guest, Arthur Baghdasaryan presented the main
directions of activity of the Armenian National Security Council. The
parties agreed to launch cooperation between the National Security
Councils of the two countries. The interlocutors discussed a broad
range of issues related to regional security and cooperation.

The Deputy Foreign Minister of Poland presented the new Eastern
Neighborhood Policy worked out together with Sweden and presented to
the consideration of the European Union. Armenia is one of the six
countries involved in the program. It envisages deeper dialogue with
the European Union, exchange of experience in the field of security

ARMENIA’S ECONOMY COULD BE DAMAGED BY OPENING OF BORDER WITH TURKEY

PanARMENIAN.Net
30.09.2008 14:46 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Since it was Turkey that closed the border, it is
up to Turkey to open it. Turkey has no right to make any demands from
Armenians in return for the opening of the border, Harut Sassounian,
the Publisher of The California Courier newspaper said in an interview
with PanARMENIAN.Net.

"Furthermore, Armenia’s economy could be damaged by the opening of
the Turkish border. The Armenian parliament should urgently pass a law
prohibiting foreign entities from leasing or buying lands located in
strategic areas of Armenia or containing strategic resources. Such a
law would ensure the economic and strategic security of the Republic,"
he said.

At the same time he noted that it would be naive to suppose that soccer
matches, cultural exchange programs or meetings of Armenian and Turkish
NGO’s could lead to reconciliation between the two countries period.

"TURKEY ACTS IN FAVOR OF NORMALIZATION OF RELATIONS WITH ARMENIA"

AZG Armenian Daily
27/09/2008

Armenia-Turkey

"We intend to create an atmosphere between Turkey and Armenia that
will contribute to solution of available problems between the two
countries", Abdulllah Gul announced in New York at a meeting with
representatives of Turkish community in the USA.

"I left for Armenia not only to watch the football match but also
to discuss the details of cooperation between the two neighborng
countries", Gul said.

According to him, the main reason of his visit was creation of
favorable conditions for normalization of relations. "I am sure that
we succeeded", Turkish President stated.

"I have high hopes that everything will become normal between our
countries", added Abdullah Gul, "Armenpress" reported.

TURKEY, IRAN AGREE TO CONTINUE TALKS ON CAUCASUS

PanARMENIAN.Net
24.09.2008 14:41 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ali Babacan held bilateral
talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Motaki, Iraqi Foreign
Minister Hoshyar Zebari, and Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic
on the sidelines of the 63rd session of the United Nations (UN)
General Assembly.

"Babacan and Motaki mainly discussed the situation in the Caucasus,"
Burak Ozugergin the spokesman for the Turkish Foreign Ministry told
reporters.

"Mr Motaki said that the situation in the region is very tense and
regional dialogue could help. He also asked Babacan to brief him on
Abdullah Gul’s recent visit to Yerevan," he said.

Babacan told Motaki that "it was not an easy decision, but it was
good to go there."

The two agreed to be in continuous contact on the Caucasus, Anadolu
reports.

RUSSIA TO HIKE GAS PRICE FOR ARMENIA

Kommersant

Sep. 23, 2008
Russia

Russia’s gas for Armenia’s clients will cost $154/ths cu meters
starting from April 1, 2009 vs. today’s $110/ths cu meters,
Armrosgazprom CEO Karen Karapetyan announced Tuesday, in time of the
meeting with Armenian President Serge Sargsyan, Interfax reported.

So, the increase will be as much as 40 percent and it will be only
the beginning. The price will soar to $200/ths cu meters from April
1, 2010, Karapetyan said. The growth will be in line with the price
increase on Russia’s energy market, but Armenia is expected to shift
to European prices from 2011. The forthcoming increase in gas prices
won’t reduce hydrocarbon consumption, Karapetyan assured.

Armenia’s president responded that the logic of negotiations with
Gazprom was based on the gradual increase in gas prices, which enables
the nation and the business to foresee the future. The growth in
prices won’t significantly affect the population, Sargsyan promised,
pointing out that it will create brilliant opportunity for the business
to improve competitive ability.

Sargsyan urged Armrosgazprom to actively proceed with Armenia’s
gasification.

Russia’s gas monopoly Gazprom inked in September of 2008 the contract
for gas supplies to Armenia in 2009 and 2010. Gazprom supplied 2.05
billion cu meters in 2007.

EURO COURT TAKES A STAND
By Mark D. Tooley

FrontPage magazine.com
/Read.aspx?GUID=ABD8FB6A-BFEB-4329-9355-5FB3681141 54
Sept 18 2008
CA

Does good ever come from the European Court? Apparently yes! Or at
least occasionally. The court ruled in favor of the Orthodox Ecumenical
Patriarchate and against the Turkish Government this summer over a
symbolically important property dispute.

Orthodox Christians in what is today Turkey once numbered in the
millions. But Islamic pressure over the centuries, continuing through
the 20th century, wore down ancient Orthodox communities through
attrition. About 30 percent of Turkey was Christian nearly a century
ago, most of them Armenian or Greek Orthodox. Today, Christians may
number fewer than 100,000 out of a population of over 60 million. And
only about 3,000 are Greek Orthodox and under the authority of the
Ecumenical Patriarch. Even under an ostensibly secular government
since the 1920’s, the dwindling Christian minority in Turkey has
suffered under various legal and social pressures, including often
insurmountable restrictions against churches retaining, much less
purchasing or developing property.

The Ecumenical Patriarch is largely restricted to a small island
of property in Istanbul. Until the European Court ruling, the
Patriarchate did not legally own any property in Turkey, including
its own administration building. Churches and related buildings, by
law, are governed by private foundations. Also by Turkish law, the
Patriarch must be Turkish born, an increasingly onerous restriction
as the number of Orthodox priests in Turkey has declined to a small
handful. With Turkey having closed the only Greek Orthodox seminary
over 30 years ago, there is a real question as to whether there will
be any Orthodox priests in future decades from whom a future Patriarch
could be selected.

The most recent dispute between the Patriarchate and the Turkish
Government involved an historical orphanage on the Turkish resort
island of Buyukada, a property that the Patriarchate bought in
1902. Since the 1930’s, the orphanage was registered as a private
foundation because Turkey would not recognize the Patriarchate as a
legal entity. Eleven years ago, the Turkish General Directorate for
Foundations (Vakiflar), which oversees non-Muslim religious groups,
seized the property after deciding the orphanage’s foundation no longer
functioned. Church properties have often been seized by the government
under this pretext, as Greek Orthodox die off or emigrate. In 1999,
the Vakiflar sought to make the orphanage legally independent of
the Patriarchate, which fought the seizure in the Turkish courts,
finally resorting to the European Court.

In July, the European Court, sitting in Strasbourg, France, ruled
that Turkey had violated the property rights clause of the European
Convention on Human Rights by seizing the orphanage without financially
reimbursing the Patriarchate. The ruling is significant because
Turkish non-recognition of property rights for non-Muslim groups is
pervasive. And if the court ruling stands, the orphanage site will
be the only property in Turkey legally assigned to the Ecumenical
Patriarchate. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom
hailed the European Court’s decision in defense of the Patriarchate’s
property, noting that Turkey chronically denies non-Muslims the
"right to own and maintain property, to train religious clergy,
and to offer religious education above high school."

According to the U.S. Commission, Turkey has "consistently used
convoluted regulations and undemocratic laws to confiscate–without
opportunity for legal appeal or financial compensation–thousands of
religious minority properties, particularly those belonging to the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and Greek Orthodox community under patriarchal
jurisdiction.

Turkey’s policies have led to the decline–and in some cases,
virtual disappearance–of some of these religious minorities on lands
they have inhabited for millennia." The dispute over the Buyukada
orphanage, with an estimated real estate value of 80 million Euros,
was the first time that the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which normally
seeks a low profile, has directly sued the Turkish Government. Turkey
has 3 months to appeal the European Court’s decision, which, unless
overturned, compels Turkey to return the property or pay for it.

"This is the first time the Ecumenical Patriarchate is recognized as
the subject of rights under international law," one of the lawyers for
the Patriarchate told the Athens News. "This is a major guarantee for
the church’s survival in Turkey." Well, at least the ruling enshrouds
the Patriarchate with some legal protection. But there are many
other petty harassments of the Patriarchate by Turkish law, which
prohibits the Patriarchate from employing the term "ecumenical" for
itself. Turkey legally acknowledges the Patriarch as only the chief
priest of the tiny Greek Orthodox minority in Turkey, even though
the international Orthodox community has recognized the Patriarch
as the communion’s senior prelate for 16 centuries. And in Turkey,
all citizens must list their religion on their identity papers,
which helps to perpetuate different treatment for non-Muslims.

The major seminary for the Orthodox in Turkey has been closed by the
government for over 30 years. And non-Turkish Orthodox priests who work
for the Patriarchate are unable to gain work visas from Turkey so they
have to continuously enter the country as tourists. In meetings with
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and other Turkish officials who belong
to the governing Islamic party, the Patriarch has been told that wider
freedoms for his flock depend on greater opportunities for Muslims
living in Greece. The Patriarch has pointed out that Orthodox living
in Turkey are native-born Turkish citizens, while Muslims in Greece,
who do in fact have greater liberties, usually are not Greek citizens.

Secularists in Turkey sometimes defend their government’s restrictions
on religious activity by arguing that greater freedoms would assist
radical Islamists far more than the small Christian minority. But the
boxing in of Turkey’s tiny Greek Orthodox population, with the evident
hope that it and its senior Patriarch will fade away altogether into
the mists of ancient history, seems exceptionally petty. The European
Court’s defense of the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s property rights,
at least in one case, may extend to the 2,000 year old Christian
community in Turkey at least a few more years of breathing space.

Mark D. Tooley directs the United Methodist committee at the Institute
on Religion and Democracy.

AZERBAIJANI AND ARMENIAN LEADERS PREPARED TO SOLVE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT: US CO-CHAIRMAN

Trend News Agency
Sept 18 2008
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan, Baku, 18 September/ TrendNews, corr R. Novruzov/ Leaders of
Azerbaijan and Armenia are prepared to solve Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,
Matthew Bryza, US co-chairman of OSCE Minsk group said.

"US fully support sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan
and prepared to help solve the conflict. The agreement should be
reached on the base of territorial integrity of Azerbaijan," Bryza
said to journalists in Baku.

The conflict between the two countries of the South Caucasus began
in 1988 due to Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Since
1992, Armenian Armed Forces have occupied 20% of Azerbaijan including
the Nagorno-Karabakh region and its seven surrounding districts. In
1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement at which
time the active hostilities ended. The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group (Russia, France, and the US) are currently holding peaceful
negotiations.

The solution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is very important. US is
prepared to assist sides in reaching agreement, Bryza said.

"Azerbaijan can rely on US assistance both in difficult times and in
peace," diplomat said.

This week, US co-chairman of OSCE Minsk Group visited the region
of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, held talks with Azerbaijani and
Armenian leadership and discussed the upcoming visit of foreign
ministers of both countries to be held in New York within meeting of
UN General Assembly.

The peace agreement between the two countries should be reached in
a way that we will suit both parties. The agreement should be honest
and accepted by both parties, Bryza said.

THIS IS EQUAL TO TREACHERY
Anahit Yesayan

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
17 Sep 2008
Armenia

Interview with SAMVEL KARAPETYAN, Head of the organization studying
the Armenian architecture

"On the day of the Turkish President Abdullah Gul’s arrival you were in
Western Armenia, and could actually see and feel the Turkish society’s
attitude towards that fact."

"The Turkish society is actually unaware of what happened in the past.

Or rather, six generations in Turkey have been educated and brought
up by such a state-national curriculum and ideology that presented
them everything just the other way about.

This time, we visited Artsati village of Erzrum. Before 1915, it was
one of the most densely populated villages, and there were exclusively
Armenian catholics inhabiting there. There is now a museum of the
Turkish Genocide in the village. Can you imagine a museum of the
Turkish Genocide in an Armenian-populated village? A group burial has
been discovered here; naturally, of Armenian people. But the Turks
present everything just the other way about, making the village one
of their important tourist attraction sites.

When the Director of the hotel of the town of Ardvin learnt that
we were Armenians, he said, ‘Hey you, Armenians! What trouble you
have made for us!’ And we asked, ‘What is it we have done?’ And he
immediately said, ‘What trick have y ou played on us in Ardvin?’ and
then I asked him, ‘How come that no Armenian was left in Ardvin while
the Turks live and prosper there? So, who now makes trouble and for
whom?’ And there, the Turk began thinking over what I had said…

"I wonder how the Turks estimate the disgraceful step of the Football
Federation of Armenia. Before the Armenia-Turkey football match,
the latter changed the logo on the uniforms of our football players,
replacing the picture of Ararat with … a football."

"On those days, ‘Aksham’, one of the Turkish periodicals, printed
the new and old colored logos of the Armenian Football Federation
on its front page and wrote that Armenia had shown a sign of good
will by removing the picture of Ararat from the logo of its football
federation.

There was accentuated irony, neglect and sarcasm in the information
published.

The next day, ‘Huriet’ published another article (showing the picture
again) expressing astonishment that the picture of Ararat had been
removed from the Logo, but President Serge Sargsyan had received
Mr. Gul below the picture of Mount Ararat.

With regard to this issue, I heard some statements in the National
Assembly.

I realized that the state had taken no initiative in this direction
(by the way, besides Mount Ararat, the Armenian scripts were also
removed from the logo). This was an independent20action by the Head
of the Football Federation.

This is equal to treachery. If someone is ready to renounce his logo
and emblem at peace time, it means he is a potential traitor. In a
little bit more serious situation, that person will commit a much
graver crime, a high treason.

I wonder whether or not he has been held accountable for that step. If
not, then we don’t have a state."

U.S. CONGRESSMEN TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE PACKAGE TO ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
18.09.2008 15:30 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard
Berman (D-CA), today, thanked Armenia for providing safe transit for
U.S. officials during the recent Georgia conflict, during Committee
consideration of a $470 million post-conflict assistance package
to Georgia, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) told
PanARMENIAN.Net.

Noting the "ripple effects" of the crisis beyond Georgia’s borders
and the absence of Armenia in the bill, Chairman Berman pledged
consideration of additional assistance to Armenia next year. He stated,
in his opening remarks, that, "I note that the ripple effects of this
crisis were clearly felt beyond Georgia’s borders. The United States
is grateful to the Armenian Government for providing safe transit
for American and international officials, relatives of diplomats
and NGO representatives and Georgia nationals. Although this bill
does not include funding for other countries in the Caucasus region,
it is my intention, when we consider the authorization of assistance
next year, to examine the wider impact of this conflict and provide
appropriate funding for Armenia and other affected countries."

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), an outspoken supporter of post-conflict
aid to Armenia and Javakhk, expressed reservations about language
in the bill, which may support the construction of a new pipeline
bypassing Armenia.

"We see that there are pipelines in Georgia," stated Rep. Sherman. "Why
are there pipelines in Georgia? Because we funded an anti-Armenia
pipeline that violates the rules of geometry – that does not use a
straight line – but rather goes around Armenia in order to benefit
those who are trying to isolate Armenia and now there is talk in this
resolution of a new pipeline – again one designed to avoid going
through Armenia territory, avoid building a peace pipeline between
Azerbaijan and Armenia."

Rep. Sherman expressed regret that assistance to Armenia was not
included in this initial $470 million allocation and pledged his
support for future consideration. The Committee adopted the measure
with a vote of 24 to 9. The remaining $530 million will be discussed
in appropriations next year.

"We commend Chairman Berman and Rep. Sherman for highlighting
Armenia’s large scale economic losses as a result of the Georgia
conflict," stated ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. "While we
had hoped that assistance to Armenia and Javakhk would be included in
this first aid package to Georgia, we will continue to work with the
Foreign Affairs and Appropriations committees to ensure that these
funds are included in future assistance packages."

The Armenian government’s post-conflict contributions have been in four
key areas: 1) Safe transit for U.S. and international officials and
relatives of diplomats, NGO representatives, and Georgian nationals;
2) reconstruction assistance for damaged Georgian infrastructure;
3) regional dialogue toward peace and stability, and; 4) alleviating
the humanitarian burden on the Georgian government.

PRECONDITIONS CONTINUE TO REMAIN AS PRECONDITIONS EVEN IF NOT EXPRESSED DIRECTLY
Lilit Poghosyan

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
16 Sep 2008
Armenia

VAHRAM ATANESYAN, Head of the Standing Committee on Foreign Relations
of the NKR National Assembly, presents his views on the recent
developments in the Armenian-Turkish relations.

"All in all, I estimate Mr. Gul’s visit as positive. There are a great
number of unresolved issues in the Armenian-Turkish relations, and the
ways towards their solution should be sought in the dialogue between
Armenia and Turkey, the Armenian people and the Turkish society. In
this respect, it is necessary to welcome the Armenian President’s
initiative of getting the dialogue on the start. Naturally, it is
impossible to make predictions on the future of the Armenian-Turkish
relations by one meeting only.

Especially considering the fact that during his visit to Baku, the
Turkish President made certain accentuations which, in my opinion,
do not quite correspond to the reality. The general impression is
that Turkey continues to stipulate its relations with Armenia by the
Armenian-Azerbaijani relations and the fact of the Karabakh issue
being unsettled.

This obviously contradicts to the general viewpoint, i.e. there
should be no precondition for establishing relations between the
two countries."

"Before and after his visit to Armenia and even during his meeting
with20 Mr. Aliev in Baku, the Turkish President refrained from the
traditional practice of communicating with Armenia in the language
of ultimatums."

"Preconditions, in all cases, remain as preconditions regardless
whether they are expressed in a direct or indirect manner. President
Gul’s visit to Baku testifies to the fact that Turkey does really see
those preconditions in its agenda. The conversation is about both
the Treaty of Kars and the recognition of the Genocide, as well as
the pro-Azerbaijani settlement of the Karabakh issue. I do really
have such a feeling."

"Nevertheless, let’s agree that this was the first case that the
Azerbaijani President, in his turn, refrained from bellicose statements
and was relatively restrained in his expressions."

"What restrains the Azerbaijani President is the current situation in
the region. Making bellicose statements after the recent developments
in South Ossetia will not simply fit the general logic of the regional
and geopolitical processes. Therefore, I wouldn’t account for it
by the fact that the Turkish President has given Mr. Aliev certain
guarantees as a result of which the latter has mitigated his rhetoric.

Or rather, the general atmosphere is such that the Azerbaijani
President could not have possibly made a statement on solving the
issue of the ‘occupied territories’ through military operations. It
would also be illogical to consider the Turkish President’s visit to
Armenia as a ‘mutual concession’ to the Armenian side. Whereas the
Azerbaijani media and politicians are inclined to interpret Mr. Gul’s
visit in their context, saying that the Turkish President has made a
concession by visiting Yerevan, and the ‘ball’ is on the playground
of the Armenian side, so to say. This is an unserious approach."

"Does it mean you don’t believe in Mr. Gul’s sincerity when he
expresses his willingness to assist in the process of the settlement
of the Karabakh conflict?"

"In my opinion, even the Turkish President himself does not believe in
his own sincerity when the conversation goes around the fair solution
of the Karabakh issue. That’s to say, the accentuations he voiced
in Baku do not show any change in Turkey’s attitude; neither do they
give any hint that President Gul is going to demonstrate impartiality
with respect to the Karabakh issue. This should be clear to everybody.

It’s one thing when the Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group or the G-8
Foreign Ministers say that the settlement should be based upon
all the fundamental principles of international law including the
peoples’ right to self-determination, and quite a different thing
when speaking about the ‘occupied territories’ and the return of the
refugees, the Turkish Pres ident seems to be putting a full stop at
this point. By doing this, he actually ‘proofreads’ the general logic
of the negotiation process, which implied a mutual concession.

If the President of Turkey puts a full stop after the return of
the ‘occupied territories’ and the refugees, and that full stop is
political in its nature, then it really doesn’t correspond either to
the developments that took place before August and the developments
that are taking place now. There is such an impression that Turkey
is trying to do something which Azerbaijan didn’t manage to do so
far and is assuming the role of a guarantor to prevent Azerbaijan
from using force against us.

God grant that I were mistaken, and my feeling proved to be wrong."

"Does the Karabakh side find the replacement of the Co-Chairs
acceptable, especially considering that this policy works to the
benefit of Turkey and to the detriment of Russia?"

"I don’t think it would be right to prefer one of the mediators to
the other. As regards Turkey, its unilateral participation cannot
certainly be constructive.

In my opinion, it would be better if the three Co-Chairs continued
working on the principles which were being discussed till the last
moment and around which the parties had expressed willingness to
negotiate in the near future."