Author: Emil Lazarian

The Hindu, India
December 13, 2004
WHY IN CALCUTTA?
BURIED IN the Armenian Church’s well-kept, well-shaded cemetery on
Armenian Street is the Rev. Harathun Shimavonian, who died in 1824.
Having lived a hundred years, his longevity itself made him a
noteworthy figure. But as his tombstone marked by an open book
attests, he was even more noteworthy for a signal contribution he
made to the Armenian nation, at the time scattered in many parts of
the world – including Madras and Calcutta. That contribution was “the
first Armenian Journal in the World”, Azdarar , which he printed and
published in 1794 in a printing press he established near the church.
The founder-editor of Azdarar could not make a success of the paper,
given the small number of Armenians in and around the city, but he
did, it is believed, print several Armenian classics in Classical
Armenian.
One of Armenia’s best-known sculptors, Levon Tokmajian, is now at
work in Calcutta, which still has an Armenian presence – though much
diminished in numbers – sculpting a 5-foot marble statue of the
Armenian priest who spent most of his life in the Madras church of
the Armenian Orthodoxy.
But the statue is to be raised in January in front of the Armenian
Church on Armenian Street in CALCUTTA. Now, I wonder why that is
being done when the Rev. Harathun Shimavonian’s achievements were in
MADRAS. Do the Armenians in Calcutta consider the tombstone in Madras
memorial enough to a pioneer in the world of printing?
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan
Dec 13 2004
MEETING AT `CHATHAM HOUSE’ CLUB
[December 13, 2004, 12:46:30]
President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev on December 13 held a meeting in
the `Chatham House’ Club in London, members of which are renowned
politicians, diplomats, media representatives, and famous European
publicists.
Chairman of the Club Lord Herd, who opened the meeting and expressed
gratitude for visiting the Club, welcomed President of Azerbaijan. He
reminded anniversary of death of the founder of the Azerbaijan State
Heydar Aliyev and expressed condolence on behalf of the meting
participants.
Addressing the meeting, President Ilham Aliyev spoke of
socio-political processes just after regaining independence, of the
hard and chaotic situation, political and economic crisis in the
Country in those years. As known, the nationwide leader of Azerbaijan
Heydar Aliyev just in those years has retuned to power on demand of
the people. Thus, thanks to his will, socio-political stability was
restored in Azerbaijan, the reforms have yielded fruits and currently
the Republic is dynamically developing.
President Ilham Aliyev dwelt on the role of Azerbaijan in the region
as well, reminded on large-scale regional economic projects being
realized in the country.
Head of the Azerbaijan State especially underlined that the major
impediment for safety and economic cooperation in the region is the
military aggression of Armenia against Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan
successively continued negotiations on peaceful settlement of the
conflicts, President Aliyev said. But we shall not cede a sod our
lands, he added. The occupied lands should be immediately liberated.
Strengthening of efforts by the UN, the Council of Europe and other
international organizations would promote fair solution of the
problem. Certain external forces back the aggressive separatism in
the former soviet space. In these questions, the double standards
should be put an end and the existing conflicts should be settled in
the frame of international legal norms and principles, within
territorial integrity of states.
President of Azerbaijan in detail spoke of integration of the
Republic to the European structures. Head of the Azerbaijan State
said the nationwide leader Heydar Aliyev has founded external and
internal policy of Azerbaijan and this policy is successfully being
continued.
President Ilham Aliyev answered questions of the meeting
participants. Lord Herd expressed deep gratitude to President of
Azerbaijan for provided information.

Azerbaijan seeks global help in Karabakh dispute
LONDON, Dec 13 (Reuters) – Azerbaijan’s president called on the
European Union and United Nations to do more to resolve a long-running
territorial dispute with neighbouring Armenia over the
Nagorno-Karabakh region on Monday.
Ilham Aliyev, who has vowed never to give up the breakaway territory
populated by ethnic Armenians but which has been legally part of
Azerbaijan since the Soviet era, said his oil-rich country was
committed to a peaceful resolution.
But he stressed years of talks had yielded no results and said the
global community should get involved.
“Other international organisations should play a more active role —
the EU, the Council of Europe and the United Nations,” Aliyev told an
audience at London’s Royal Institute of International Affairs.
“I think that broad international attention and keeping this issue on
the agenda of international organisations will help bring peace,” he
added, giving no further details.
Western companies, including Britain’s BP have invested heavily in
Azerbaijan, most notably in the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline which will
deliver oil from the Caspian to the Mediterranean.
The dispute over the mountainous Nagorno-Karabakh region began 16
years ago but it erupted into one of the bloodiest ethnic wars in the
dying days of the Soviet Union, when an estimated 35,000 people were
killed.
About 1 million refugees fled to Azerbaijan and thousands of ethnic
Armenian refugees also fled to Armenia.
A truce was agreed in 1994 but there has been little movement to end
the dispute.
Last month Azerbaijan urged the U.N. General Assembly to intervene but
France, Russia and the United States asked the body not to interfere
with efforts they were making on behalf of the Organisation for
Security and Cooperation in Europe.
“Azerbaijan will never agree to occupation and we will do what we can
and make sure our land will be free,” said Aliyev.
The president has signalled some impatience and does not rule out
military action if Armenia does not pull out.
Experts also note that Azerbaijan is actively working on defence
projects and increasing its defence budget.
12/13/04 13:16 ET
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Turkey ‘must admit WWI genocide’
France has said Turkey must improve its human rights record
BBC News
Monday, 13 December, 2004
France has said it will ask Turkey to acknowledge the mass killing of
Armenians from 1915 as genocide when it begins EU accession talks.
French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said Turkey had “a duty to
remember”.
Armenians say 1.5 million of their people died or were deported from
their homelands under Turkish Ottoman rule. France is among a group of
nations that class the killings as genocide. Turkey denies any organised
genocide, claiming they were quelling a civil uprising.
Mr Barnier said France did not consider Turkish acknowledgement a
condition of EU entry, but insisted his country would raise the issue
once talks opened.
Where Turkey’s bid stands
Speaking to reporters after a meeting of EU foreign ministers to discuss
plans to invite Turkey for accession talks, Mr Barnier said Turkey “must
carry out this task as a memorial”.
In addition, France believes that accession talks should not begin
before the second half of 2005, Mr Barnier said. Turkey has pushed for
immediate negotiations.
“I believe that when the time comes, Turkey should come to terms with
its past, be reconciled with its own history and recognise this
tragedy,” Mr Barnier said.
‘So-called genocide’
His comments drew no immediate official response from Turkey, which has
consistently denied orchestrating genocide and the Armenian figures. A
foreign ministry spokesman in the Turkish capital, Ankara, told Reuters
that Turkey has never and will never recognise “any so-called genocide”.
Armenia alleges that the Young Turks, in 1915 the dominant party in the
Ottoman Empire, systematically arranged the deportation and killing of
1.5 million Armenians. Turkish relations with independent Armenia, which
borders Turkey to the north, have long been coloured by the issue.
Around 300,000 Armenians live in France, more than in any other European
country, and community leaders have pledged to pressure French President
Jacques Chirac on the genocide issue during Turkish accession negotiations.
France passed a law officially recognising the Armenian genocide in
2001, cooling relations with Turkey and scuppering a major arms deal.
Another 14 nations, including Switzerland, Russia and Argentina, also
classify the killings as genocide.
PHOTO CAPTION: “France will pose this question. I think that a big
country like Turkey has a duty to remember” — Michel Barnier, French
foreign minister
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PRESS RELEASE
December 13, 2004
American University of Armenia Corporation
300 Lakeside Drive, 4th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 987-9452
Fax: (510) 208-3576
Contact: Gohar Momjian
E-mail: [email protected]
ARMENIA CONFERENCE CONCLUDES USAID EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY PROGRAM
More than 200 people participated in a conference on December 2 and 3, which
focused on the successes of the USAID Earthquake Zone Recovery Program. The
conference, From Recovery to Development: 2000-2005, was jointly convened by
USAID, the Government of the Republic of Armenia, the Urban Institute, and
the American University of Armenia at the Marriott Armenia Hotel in Yerevan.
The Conference marked the successful completion of USAID’s Earthquake Zone
Recovery Program (EQZRP) and acknowledged USAID’s assistance to the
Government of Armenia in approaching closure to shelter compensation in the
earthquake zone while, at the same time, fostering local economic
development. USAID’s implementing partner in this project is the Urban
Institute, in collaboration with Catholic Relief Services and the American
University of Armenia.
The $35 million EQZRP program ends in December 2004 and has been the largest
single endeavor of USAID/Armenia in the Mission’s twelve years of rendering
humanitarian and technical assistance to Armenia.
The Conference highlighted the primary results of EQZRP. Approximately 7,000
families – about 30,000 individuals – received permanent housing with 6,270
families benefiting from Housing Purchase Certificates and more than 700
families benefiting from Housing Improvement Grants. Over 120 municipal
sites have been reclaimed by the clearing of temporary shelters in five
cities, more than 50 sites that were formerly occupied by temporary shelters
have been redeveloped and are undergoing urban development, more than 100
public buildings and other sites – schools, kindergartens, museums, parks,
and squares — have been reclaimed and returned to the communities for use,
and over 4,000 temporary shelters have been removed.
Conference participants included US Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans,
USAID/Armenia Director, Robin Phillips, members of the Government of Armenia
and the 18 local governments partnering in the USAID Earthquake Zone
Recovery Program, non-governmental and other organizations that provided
services to the Program, the international donor community contributing to
the development of the earthquake zone, and Program staff and partners
including banks, auditors, engineers, and real estate professionals.
USAID/Armenia Director, Mr. Robin Phillips, cited the primary achievements
of the Earthquake Zone Recovery Program: `Since the year 2000, well over
6,000 households have already obtained permanent housing using Housing
Certificates in Gyumri, Akhuryan, Vanadzor, Gugark, Spitak, Stepanavan,
Maralik, Amasia, Jajur Station and Aparan. And 664 families in nine
communities in Shirak and Lori Marzes also have benefited by the Housing
Improvement Grant Program.’ Mr. Phillips continued, `The Program’s
`Planning for Redevelopment’ component focuses on leveraging capital
infusion through housing certificates and housing improvement grants to
promote restoration of the urban fabric of the communities and to foster
local economic development, in particular in Gyumri and Spitak, which have
undergone the most visible transformations.’
********************
The American University of Armenia is registered as a non-profit educational
organization in both Armenia and the United States and is affiliated with
the Regents of the University of California. Receiving major support from
the AGBU, AUA offers instruction leading to the Masters Degree in eight
graduate programs. For more information about AUA, visit

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Dec 11 2004
Turkey’s EU Membership and the Armenian Question
View: Sedat Laciner
Some radical groups in Europe link Turkey’s EU membership with the
Armenian question and advocate that Turkey should not become an EU
member before it addresses the Armenian demands. The question spans
over a large area from the events that are argued to have taken place
during Ottoman times, interpreted differently by Armenians and Turks,
to the problem of terrorism and the invasion of Nagorno-Karabakh. It
can be understood that the problem cannot be solved at once. Even
though the emergence of Armenia in the international scene as an
independent state has brought expectations that there is a chance for
solution , in due course it has become evident that there are some
psychological problems at the root of the problem. The initiatives
taken by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) and the US on the international stage have been disabled by
some radical groups. The manipulative efforts of this narrow group of
people make it extremely difficult for convergence to occur. They
have established a virtual industry of enmity and argue that Turkey
should accept their allegations without any debate and claim that
otherwise dialogue between Turkish and Armenian peoples and states is
impossible. However, the true problem can be said to stem from the
security / threat perceptions in Armenia and the prejudices against
the Turks among the diaspora Armenians:
As a country of 2.5 to 3 million, Armenia is surrounded by a Turkish
population over 100 million and has lived through a perceived
`Turkish threat’ for over a decade. Unfortunately, various radical
groups and some countries have fueled this perception. This is such
that even though no Armenian territory is invaded, conversely,
Armenia occupies a fifth of Azerbaijan’s territories, these fears
still linger on and some important circles in Armenia advocate an
increase in the defense budget against the so-called Turkish threat.
The case of the Armenian Diaspora is even more tragic: The Armenian
Diaspora is twice the size of Armenia’s population and these people
are scattered all across the world. As there was no independent
Armenian state for a long time, these people drew closer to radical
groups in order to promote Armenian interests. Moreover, by
underlining cultural and religious differences, they avoided
assimilation in other societies. One instrument that was used in
avoiding assimilation was the `Turkish threat’. The common feelings
against the Turks united the Armenian diaspora societies and they
enjoyed of being part of a society, nation and race. Though an
independent Armenian state was established the Armenian Diaspora was
not changed in nature and continued to use victimization and
historical hostilities as a uniting factor. Interestingly the
Diaspora with its financial and political superiority has dominated
the Armenia’s domestic politics. It can be argued that the Armenian
Diaspora in Europe and the US with the Karabakh Armenians are the
most significant group who radicalize Turkish-Armenian relations.
Etyem Mahcupyan, a Turkish Armenian columnist, criticized the
Diaspora Armenians in an international conference held in France in
November 2004:
`You do not want a solution, but revenge… The diaspora makes politics
by using the deaths and the past sufferings. But the politics is for
the living people… The Armenians in diaspora oppose Turkey’s entry to
the EU. It means that they do not sincerely wish Turkey’s acceptance
`genocide’. They prefer to make politics by using the deaths and the
past… Opposing Turkey’s EU membership is not Armenia’s and Turkey
Armenians’ interest.’
Hrant Dink, another Turkish Armenian, argued in the same conference
that the Armenian diaspora has not been able to change itself:
`The Armenian diaspora usually claim that Turkey and its policies on
Armenian issue cannot be changed. They are wrong. As a matter of fact
that the diaspora do not change. The world has changed. Turkey has
been changing. However the diaspora cannot catch the change. Normally
the diaspora has to be in the change and must support the change and
democratization process in Turkey. Today the European Armenian
diaspora, the French Armenians in particular, oppose Turkey’s EU bid.
They must question their anti-Turkey campaigns, because Turkey’s
entry to the EU changes and democratizes Turkey. If Turks and
Armenians will find a solution, it will be in Turkey’s EU process.’
As it can be seen from this account, an important part of the
Armenian question is historical and cultural prejudices and a
perception of threat rather than an actual one is preeminent.
The efforts to improve Turkish-Armenian-Azerbaijani relations have
continuously hit this barrier since 1992: For example, the US
government admits that in implementing its Caucasian plans, the
Turkish-Armenian dispute has always served as an obstacle. The EU has
much to drawn on the US’s endeavors to foment Turkish-Armenian
friendship since Armenia’s independence. The US has applied many
different ways which included pressurizing Turkey, Armenia, and
Azerbaijan; implementing economic sanctions against Azerbaijan;
forcing the sides to the negotiating table; increasing economic aid
to Armenia on an unprecedented scale; using Azerbaijani oil as a
motive for convergence. However, as it was previously stated, it has
proven impossible to break down the prejudices and psychological
barriers on all sides, especially on the Armenian side. The most
effective way to break this deadlock is the genuine guarantee by a
credible power that all three countries can accept. The US’s
guarantees have not fulfilled any of the three, and mostly Armenia.
However, the EU’s position can be different:
Turkey’s EU membership and the EU’s assurances towards the region
would prove tangible and suitable for the region. Moreover, both
Armenia and Azerbaijan will seek full membership next and will live
through this promise, traversing a serious divide.
The most promising aspect of this picture is that all sides give
priority to EU membership. A government that is keen on EU membership
is in power in Turkey. Moreover, the current Erdogan government’s
foreign policy is based on an understanding that can be epitomized as
`zero problem with neighbors’ and `win-win policy’. According to this
understanding, Armenia and Turkey can mutually benefit from closer
association. That is, Armenia’s loss is not Turkey’s gain. In the
same light, there is a serious transformation on the Armenian side.
The government is the same and is led by a `hawk’, Robert Kocharian,
and makes caustic remarks every now and then. However, following
September 11, it is observed that Armenia can no longer sustain a
policy that is mostly military in nature and is closely based on
military cooperation with Russia, Iran, and Syria at the expense of
the US. Even though Armenia terms these policies as `complementary
foreign policy options’ and argues that it satisfies all countries
and groups, international conjuncture does not allow this to go on
and that Armenia is now in a serious quest for new a option. For the
first time since independence, EU membership began occupying a
serious position in Armenia. There is a significant increase in the
number of those who express that Armenia’s future lies in the EU. In
short, just like Turkey, Armenia also aims to become an EU member.
The similarity in their goals will ease the tension in the two
countries’ relations. It is unavoidable for the two countries,
members of the same organization, to come to a better understanding
and stop perceiving each other as a threat. In this respect, Turkey’s
EU membership can abate Armenia’s fears. For at the center of the
fear fed by the radicals in Armenia is the understanding that Turkey
is an intractable power and can lay great harm to Armenia. Even
though this is mere fantasy, this is how reality is understood.
Turkey’s EU membership will at first alleviate this fear. For no EU
member can singularly pursue aggressive policies. Moreover, Armenia
will come to understand that Turkey, seeking EU membership, will
refrain from pursuing an aggressive policy towards Armenia.
In this respect, it is unrealistic and ill-willed to argue that
Turkey’s EU membership will negatively affect Turkish-Armenian
relations. Those who advocate this statement argue that the two
countries do not have diplomatic contacts and with EU membership,
Turkey would have less use of Armenia and will become even less bound
in its dealings with Armenia. However, even at Turkey’s present
economic and political position, it is not in dire need of Armenia.
Turkey is not a country to sustain great economic losses, even if the
borders remain closed for centuries. Despite this fact, it was Turkey
for the past 14 years that has taken the steps for convergence and to
hold, bilateral, trilateral, and multilateral meetings. Even though
the Karabakh question involves Armenia and Azerbaijan, Turkey
endeavored arduously to bring the two countries together.
Secondly, there is no economic embargo or sanction in practice:
Thousands of Armenians work in Istanbul, Turkey and the Turkish
international airports are open to civilian Armenian planes. As a
matter of fact that the Turkish-Armenian trade volume is over 200
million dollars though the Turkish-Armenian border is closed. All
these events signal that Turkey has a clear intention to establish
diplomatic relations with Armenia, improve relations, and even move
beyond from neighborly relations to lifting the borders between the
two countries’ markets.
In this respect, Turkey has three simple requests from Armenia:
1) To expressly recognize the borders of Turkey and Armenia’s
neighbors and the declaration that these borders will be respected,
2) To end the occupation of one-fifth of Azerbaijan’s territories and
to stop resorting to violence in solving problems,
3) To stop situating the events of 1915 that Armenia claims to have
taken place at the center of its relations with Turkey.
As it can be seen, these requests are both quite easy to fulfill and
based on the basic principles of the UN, NATO, and the EU, namely,
respect for borders and the unchangeableness of borders through
violence. In view of how the EU considered Northern Cyprus to be
under occupation and imposed a harsh embargo on the Turkish Republic
of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), denying recognition, not even admitting it
as a political entity and how severe NATO’s response was towards
Serbian aggression, Turkey’s response towards the occupation of
one-fifth of Azerbaijan by Armenia can be considered to be quite
innocent and even moderate.
As with the Armenian side’s interpretation of 1915, suffice to say
that people are entitled to their opinions. Some radical Armenian
groups interpret the Armenian insurgency of 1915 in the Ottoman
Empire as `genocide’ and demands Turkey to recognize this as such or
be denied EU membership. It is not right to think that just because
some Armenians think that should Turkish-Armenian relations remain
frozen for eternity. Genocide is a legal term and its scope is
determined by international legal treaties. As much audience is
granted to one side, the other side of the equation also deserves to
be heard. More importantly, while the past is dealt with, the
construction of the future should also paid attention. From here
onwards, the radical Armenian groups can interpret the 1915 the way
they want but if there is a desire to improve relations with the
Turks, the insult-like remarks against Turkey and the Turkish people
need to be avoided when talking about events that happened almost a
century ago. Dialogue can start from the most debatable subject, not
the most problematic one.
To sum up, it can be said that Turkey’s most problematic relationship
in the region is with the Armenians and that despite its
well-intended efforts, progress has been limited. As there are two
sides in the Turkish-Armenian dispute, the EU and other Western
countries have had an obstructive effect in the Caucasus. Armenia’s
reluctance to join the regional strategy of Western institutions and
countries due to its security perceptions both isolates Armenia and
plunges it into harder situations and bars the West from implementing
its strategy. In this context, a healthy Caucasus policy should aim
at Turkish-Armenian convergence. This can only be achieved through
Turkey’s EU membership that will bring Armenia closer to EU
institutions. With Turkey’s EU membership, Armenia will approach
Turkey with less suspicion and prejudice and new channels of dialogue
will spring by the EU. As the only EU member in the region, Turkey
will assume a role aiming to increase stability and cooperation even
further and change its policies against Armenia from one of
adversaries to that of bringing Armenia closer to the EU system.
In concluding the Armenian question, a useful point to mention is
Turkey’s Armenians. Some Armenian lobby groups in Europe talk about
the minority rights in Turkey and demand accession to be held back
until improvement in this area comes about. First of all, these
claims, not shared by Turkish-Armenians and the Istanbul Armenian
Patriarchate, are not reflective of the truth. Even if it is accepted
for one moment that there is an element of truth in these arguments,
it will be seen that as Turkey converges with the EU, its
self-confidence grows and demonstrates significant progress in the
field of minority rights. The great effort spent by Mesrob II, the
Patriarch of Istanbul, supporting Turkey’s EU membership and his
touring of Europe to persuade EU members is quite telling. Also, a
survey conducted among Istanbul’s Armenians that yielded a pro-EU
rate of 60 percent is also very important in showing the support for
Turkey’s EU membership among Armenian citizens.
Dr. Sedat LACINER
Director International Strategic research Organization (ISRO), Ankara

PanArmenian News
Dec 10 2004
SERIOUS CHANGES EXPECTED IN NKR GOVERNMENT
10.12.2004 17:16
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “Domination of bureaucracy can be observed at some
levels of power and many representatives of the executive power
estranged themselves from the people”, Nagorno Karabakh President
Arkady Ghukasian stated at the meeting with the parents of perished
soldiers of Karabakh. In this view, he said, serious structural
changes will take place in the NKR government. In the opinion of some
analysts, the changes can be connected with the municipal elections
held this August, when an opposition candidate became the mayor of
Stepanakert.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARCHBISHOP AGHAN BALIOZIAN AMONG A TEN-PERSON DELEGATION FROM
AUSTRALIA TO VISIT INDONESIA FOR DIALOGUE ON INTERFAITH COOPERATION
SYDNEY, December 9 (Noyan Tapan). The 10-person delegation from
Australia arrived this morning after participating in a Dialogue on
Interfaith Cooperation in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The Dialogue involved
religious leaders from the major faiths and religions and Interfaith
experts from the South East Asia region that included Australia,
Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, New Zealand,
Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor Leste and
Viet Nam. The theme of the Dialogue was “Dialogue on Interfaith
Cooperation: Community Building and Harmony”.
At the invitation of Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia, the
Hon. Alexander Downer M.P., His Eminence Archbishop Aghan Baliozian,
Primate of the Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church of Australia
and New Zealand, was among the delegation from Australia that included
six Christian leaders representing the Catholic, Anglican, Uniting,
Lutheran and Armenian Orthodox Churches, plus representatives from the
Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu faiths.
According to the Press Office of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of
Australia and New Zealand, the Dialogue on Interfaith Cooperation is a
joint Australia-Indonesia initiative announced by Mr Downer and his
Indonesian counterpart, H.E. Dr N. Hassan Wirajuda at the ASEAN
meetings in Jakarta in July.
The broad objective of the Dialogue is to convene discussion among
world denominations and to foster greater understanding and
cooperation between the various faith communities in the region. By
working together more closely, there is also much potential to resolve
the challenges that face communities today.
On his return, Archbishop Aghan said: “It was a high level delegation
that demonstrated a mutual respect and understanding toward differing
faiths and beliefs. It is with real hope that the dialogue will
continue to create real harmony in the region.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Roj TV, Denmark
Dec 10 2004
>From writers’ point of view, Kurds and EU: Every one should make
attempts
While campaigns like “Yes to Discrepancies, No to Separatism” are
being held on solution of Kurd Problem, which is a significant
parameter in relations between Turkey and the European Union (EU) and,
comes on the agenda in accordance with regional relationships, some
authors pointed the significance of the problem to be solved.
By referring to the Dec. 17 summit, they stated that the problem
should be solved even if a date for the start of talks were not
announced. Armenian Author Mýgýrdiç Margosyan says: ”I wish, we took
steps in democratization, liberty and human rights for ourselves not
by impositions. If we enter the EU, if such a process comes true , I
think, several problems of minorities and especially of Kurds will be
solved easily.”
Turkish foreign policy has been focused on the 17 Dec, when a Road Map
will be drawn for the membership of Turkey. Whether or not to give a
date for starting membership negotiations with Turkey will be
determined on Dec.17. Some discussions are being made on Kurd, Cyprus
and Aegean Sea Problems, and labor power and Turkey’s economical
picture is awaited on the table of the EU. It is considered crucial in
terms of Kurd Problem that President of European Parliament Josep
Borrell Fontelles visited Diyarbakir after Ankara, in his presidency
capacity.
Kurdish, Turkish, Armenian and Circassion writers answered to question
”How it fixing a date of starting negations to Turkey on Dec. 17 may
contribute to the solution of Kurd Problem.”
Armenian Author Migirdich Margosyan: ”I am in favour of those who
think that Turkey should access to the EU because the union open some
doors for us. Let’s face it or not, we obliged to either reluctantly
or compulsorily make declinations on democratization, becoming free,
human rights and all the others. That one may say these new steps were
taken by impositions or recommendations. If wish, it would not have
happened so, namely, I wish, we ourselves would have done the new
expansions neither by these or those policies of the EU nor by its
two-way polices (harsh and soft) I do never agree in what our
politicians said or are saying that they wanted all of those works for
their humans, since if there were something like this, would not have
faced the impositions of the EU. If we are deigning to some
modifications in the Turkish constitution, this have occurred as
result of the EU pressure. I see it entering the EU to be useful. I
believe that the unity will make contributions to the solution of Kurd
Problem. If we enter the EU, if such a process comes true, I think,
several problems of minorities and especially of Kurds will be solved
easily.”
‘Solution is a process and end everyone should endeavour’
Circassion Poet Mansur Balcý says: ”Firstly, the accession to the EU
does not mean that every thing will be solved at once. A process or a
type of life like we are in the union is experienced in the talks
operation. This a mutual interest and will be lived as a process. I
had to write in Turkish in place of my mother tongue, but now everyone
is able to produce by both mother tongue and joint language, which is
an unbelievable wealth. When the guns lay down, soldiers attempted to
establish the voice of peace but Intelligentsia was not involved in
the process. But it is not the soldier that will constitute the
language of peace. Kurd Problem will not be solved in a day by
accessing to European society, this is a process. Every one should
struggle for this operation.”
‘There is a need to peace’
Writer and Poet Haydar Ergülen say:” I hope this will be more
positive and will give way to more positive results in Kurd Problem.
I believe, in fact I wish, that peace operation will come true. I wish
this for all the young; not only those on mounts but also soldiers. I
do not the blood to be shed any more. Nobody needs blood but every
body is in need of peace.
Author Cezmi Ersoz: “After Dec. 17, some impositions will be started
by the EU. No doubt, this process will create new areas of liberty in
Kurd Problem, beside expansions. It also caused an atmosphere of
debate. I wish Dec. 17 end safe and sound. This is process may augment
and last 15 years. Even if the European Union does not our
participation in the unity, this will make us achieve some
declinations and provide new fields of liberty. Even we do not access
to the EU, we should appraise the operation well. This process, at
least, will create an environment in which Kurdish Public is given
opportunity to live with Turkish counterpart. I wish no misfortune,
provocation and coup d’état happen and I also wish no tension appear
between Peoples. We must have a common sense more to fulfill the
process. Two Publics should be open to dialog, as should their
actors. A shepherd in Hakkari and a 12-year boy were killed. Some ones
press the button. I want the intelligentsia to be sensitive about
these provocations. I am optimistic. Yes, a date will be given.”
Syrian Author Sherko Cihani: ”If Turkey goes in the EU, it should
make rooted changes. They should also provide assistance. Just like
how the EU promoted the unity of nations inside, It should endure this
for Turkish and Kurdish Peoples. The 1st and 2nd World Wars made
Europeans kill each other. There were too many combats. The German
killed the French, as the latter did the same, but today these people
live friendly together. There is no boundary between them but there is
one between Turks and Kurds. This border is combat and blood. Blood of
humans is shed. Ocalan has interpreted these in his defense. A
response should be given to KONGRA-GEL (Kurdistan People’s
Congress). EU should not want KONGRA-GEL to surround to, which is not
such a system to cave in. Maybe, within the framework of democracy,
justice and humanity KONGA-GEL may be a political party in
Turkey. Just like how we see political parties of some groups in
Europe, Turkey must officially admit KONGRA-GEL. In addition, the
gangs must be removed and militarism has to be reduced. Two committees
came to Turkey and had good practices, nevertheless the country
constantly held military operations. They should stop and as well as
village guard system to be abolished. Good economical grounds should
be laid down in Kurdistan by Turkey and Europe. Not only for a
democratic Turkey but also a democratic Middle East Europe should have
works. The date should be given according to Turkey’s practices .A
term for negotiations should be given to Turkey. As to its practices
the date can be taken back because Turkey may not take these steps
easily.
Writer Altay Marti: ”A thing between to give or not give a date for
negotiations will happen. A date will be given but, we will not
understand whether we have been taken to unity or not. I do not think
that no change will happen in economy, Turkey’s Kurd policy and
general picture of the country. As a matter of fact, we understand
this from what has happened hitherto. Three are thousands types of
pressure. These are, too, a matter of the process, but in the long
term both the Kurds and Turks need a more democratic, humanely and
prosperous life. I do not think that Europe will solve all these at
once. That the President of European Parliament came to Diyarbakir is
a sample that shows where the problem will be solved. Even if some
parts of People in Turkey do not know where the problem will be
solved, the dominants do know. As they know they come here,
Diyarbakir. I would like a democratic expansion for all of us.
Author, Tuna Kiremitci: ”Generally, we need to solve our national
problem. What is Kurd? What is Turk? What is the relation between the
Kurd and Turk? How it should be? It will be very nice, if these cause
us to answer the questions that have not been answered through out the
history of Turkish Republic, if we, ourselves, succeed in doing
this. Even though the thing that had had to be done before a long time
is delayed, it will have been fulfilled. We would want to realize the
process without requiring the EU, but we can wangle by ourselves. I am
thinking now that ”Yes” will be said to Turkey”
Syrian Kurdish Writer Deham Abdulfettah: ”In the EU, It will be good
to give a date to Turkey. If the Kurd Problem comes on the agenda of
the EU, this will be good. When Turkey enters the unity, the laws of
the union will effective on the Turkish state.”
Author Suheyla Acar: ” I do not believe that during the operation of
membership, the EU will not dictate the solution of Kurd Problem to
Turkey, if political balances are thought. Therefore, if this problem
is solved in Turkey, this will be done by the approach of political
power. This is a sensitive subject at which political power in Turkey
is strong. The problem can be solved stage by stage and with the of
passing over some hindrances. This will take time. I do not think it
to be solved at a night. I am not a political scientist and my
foresights may not be true but, I think that a date will be given,
because this is not a thing to be put on the table as only Turkey’s
demand. From Europe’s point of view, this bears importance. I do not
think the EU to run a risk.
Kurdolog Emir Hasanpour: ”It makes a positive effect in general but
this is not absolute. The Kurds should not think every thing will be
solved and be happy. They also should not be consoled, because there
is affirmativeness only at proportion of what the Turkish state has
compensated. If Turkey tells: ‘I do not admit this’, Europe can not
press on Turkey with works. Turkey, too, should be willing in solving
the question.”
Critic Hayri Kako Yetik , one of the founders of Agora journal says:
”We ourselves should solve the question but, in the EU accession
process, unfortunately the laws are modified with the pressure of the
EU. Even if this comes from Europe, we affirm it. The most important
thing is to exceed our prejudices. Without exceeding our prejudices,
there is not much to be realized in life. The prejudiced opinion of
people about Kurds must be broken. Turks are prejudiced against Kurds,
and the latter’s also biased against the formers. The same prejudices,
unfortunately, is there between Arabs and Turks. This jaundice which
is rooted from the past must be abolished. The politician should put
aside their political accounts. Those who are in favour of peace,
brotherhood, humanity must raise their voice a lot. These sectors
should be self-denying. The democrats should be radical democrats. In
an other word , every body should do their duties for democracy to be
radically defended and for democracy to be implemented in practice. If
these are done, there will be obstacle on the way of solving Kurd
Problem. The biggest hindrance standing on the solution cited is the
prejudices of the politicians and also self-seeking accounts. If this
has been exceeded, I think, the question will be solved in a short
time. The peoples do not have enmity against each other. A date of
negotiations will be given.”
Syrian Kurdish Writer Rizoye Ose: ”Human Rights and especially those
of Kurds will be accepted in Turkey. If Turkey does not the rights of
the Kurds, It will not pay attention to the accession of the EU, at
all. Turkey should approve these rights to be able feel itself from
the soul of EU. If Turkey is sincere, it should accept the dues but,
if play a trick, won’t admit. If the Turkish state wants to show that
it is from the soul of EU, it will approach democracy, human rights
and Kurd Question in a positive manner. The EU soul already has human
rights. If Turkey fulfills the requirements, the date will be given.
Author Tuncay Akgun: ”I am in favor of the accession of Turkey to
Europe, which will be nice, if happen. Some hindrances may appear, but
I think, Turkey will be approved to the unity. There are some steps
taken by Turkey for the sake of democracy. I think the Turkish
administration to be important, as do the representation of Kurds in
Turkey. Here, there some things that have changed .Due to Hisbullah
terror, there was a fear of death 10 years ago. I think we should lead
to a normal process. For me, we should solve the problem here,in
Turkey. We ourselves should do.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Reuters
Dec 9 2004
Armenia hopes Turkey in EU will reopen border
09 Dec 2004 19:34:46 GMT
Source: Reuters

By Sebastian Alison
BRUSSELS, Dec 9 (Reuters) – Turkish accession to the EU should lead
to a more open society which would open its border with Armenia and
recognise a genocide of Armenians early last century, Armenia’s
foreign minister said on Thursday.
Vardan Oskanyan told Reuters in an interview that the European Union
should press Turkey “aggressively” to reopen the border. EU leaders
decide next week whether to start accession negotiations with Turkey.
“Certainly if Turkey becomes an EU member and implements all the
requirements, meets the criteria, that would mean Turkey would be a
much more open society,” he said.
“Armenia would like to see the open border issue… be raised by the
European Union more assertively, more loudly, even more aggressively,
because this is an important issue also for the European Union,”
Oskanyan added.
Armenia says 1.5 million of its people died between 1915 and 1923 in
a systematic genocide and says the decision to carry it out was taken
by the political party then in power in the Ottoman Empire, popularly
known as the Young Turks.
Turkey denies genocide and relations with Armenia have been tense
ever since. Their border is closed because of Armenia’s occupation of
part of Azerbaijan including the ethnic Armenian enclave of
Nagorno-Karabakh.
Oskanyan said recognition of the genocide was still on Yerevan’s
foreign policy agenda, and he hoped Turkish accession to the EU would
help achieve it.
“In the case of EU accession we hope it will lead to much freer
discourse within the country which eventually may lead to
recognition.”
Oskanyan said if EU membership forced Turkey to open the border, it
would facilitate trade and boost the economy in poor eastern regions
of Turkey as well as in Armenia.
“Turkey’s foreign policy should be in line with Brussels,” he said.
“That means Turkey cannot have closed borders with its neighbours.”
NEW NEIGHBOURS
He added that Armenia had lost an estimated $1 billion in trade over
the last 10 to 15 years because of the closure, and the EU needed to
push for its reopening.
“After all Armenia, along with the other two Caucasus countries
(Azerbaijan and Georgia) is a member of the European Neighbourhood
Policy,” he said, referring to a new EU initiative to boost ties with
its closest neighbours.
“We have no border with any other EU or prospective EU member state,
Turkey is the only one. If they do not take that obligation, do not
rise to the occasion, the whole new neighbourhood policy will be
rendered obsolete, at least for Armenia.”
Armenia is also in dispute with its neighbour Azerbaijan over the
Nagorno-Karabakh region, wholly within Azerbaijan, populated mainly
by Christian ethnic Armenians, and which broke away from Azeri rule
as the Soviet Union collapsed. The two went to war over it following
the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Oskanyan said he was cautiously optimistic on progress towards peace
with Azerbaijan, after a difficult period when veteran Azeri leader
Haydar Aliyev died at the end of 2003 and was replaced by his son,
Ilham.
“The start was very difficult with the Azeris after the change of
players,” he said. “I guess both sides are beginning to warm up to
each other and that gives us some hope that we will be able to make
some progress.”