Author: Frangulian Shushan

Oil-for-food for thought
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, PA
Feb 13 2005
Once upon a time, it was possible to read the newspaper, single out a
national public figure and tell your family, gathered for breakfast,
“Now, that’s a man you can trust.”
Today, trust is in such short supply that to claim almost any one
as trustworthy takes real courage. Not just courage, but you have to
have a good, long memory.
Now, Washington and New York insiders are wondering just whom to
trust. This stems from the U.N. oil-for-food program. We are expected
to put our trust in a very mixed bag of individuals.
These “trustworthy” individuals range from the U.N. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan and his son Kojo, to former Secretary-General Boutros
Boutros-Ghali and his many relatives. Then there’s a very senior
U.N. employee, Benon Sevan, together with some 60 members of the
oil-for-food investigative group. And let’s not forget former chairman
of the U.S. Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker.
Everything began with stories on how Mr. Sevan, the head of the
oil-for-food efforts, received secret oil gifts from Saddam Hussein
and passed some of them to so-called statesmen in different parts of
the world who could use their influence for Saddam against the world.
After months of evasions and haggling, Mr. Annan took the very dubious
Dan Rather/CBS solution. Instead of putting a genuine independent in
charge of a truly autonomous inquiry team, he persuaded Mr. Volcker
to put his reputation on the line and lead the investigation.
This caused a problem. In his resume, as published by the United
Nations, there was no mention that he was a director of the U.N.
Nations Association of the United States of America or of the very
active Business Council of the United Nations.
So, in recent years the “independent” head of the oil-for-food
investigation was running the U.N.’s prime advocacy group in the
United States. In addition, Volcker is a former member of the elitist
Trilateral Commission, a small group of internationalists formed by
David Rockefeller in 1973.
There also are links between Volcker and a major shareholder in the
French oil company TotalFinaElf, which had billions of dollars in
contracts with the Iraqi government. That link ties into a shadowy
Iraqi, Achmed Chalabi, who last year was an “unofficial” adviser to
Iraq’s Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). Mr. Chalabi’s advice
was to initiate an oil-for-food investigation using TotalFinaElf’s
accounting firm.
This was done. But L. Paul Bremer, the CPA’s administrator, put in
Ernst & Young as his own watchdog.
Surprise, surprise. Lots turned out wrong. Our State Department
investigators came up with evidence that Chalabi was an Iranian spy.
Chalabi has defenders in the Pentagon who are now feuding with the
State Department and the suspected spy may well become an important
figure in the new Iraqi government.
But, bad news for Paul Volcker. He also was involved in the Enron
scam. He was the man with the whitewash brush brought in by Arthur
Andersen to make sure that none of its executives went to jail for
obstructing justice by shredding Enron’s documents.
Despite his years of experience, Volcker took his U.N. job without
asking for subpoena powers, or to safeguard documents held in Iraq,
or authority to cooperate with any U.S.law-enforcement organization.
Volcker’s initial report this month did not include a smoking gun. It
was considered “politically correct” to avoid the major role not
of Kofi Annan and his son Kojo, but also the former U.N. chieftain
Boutros-Ghali — an Egyptian — and his friends from Cyprus and
Lebanon who are of Armenian descent and who are all members of Coptic
Christian congregations.
There was Cypriot Joseph Stephanides, once director of public affairs
at the Security Council; Benon Sevan, another Cypriot, alleged to have
stolen from the United Nations for some 40 years, and who got his
hands on millions of barrels of oil allocations. There was Boutros,
who after one term at the United Nations, was vetoed by the United
States for a second term, but who set up the oil-for-food program.
Last week, in a British newspaper, Boutros ratted out Kofi Anan,
saying that he, Kofi, did everything that Boutros had done. And,
anyway, the Security Council was responsible.
Then there are Boutros’s relatives. A cousin of Boutros, the Egyptian
oil trader, Fakhry Abdelnour, owner of an oil company based in Geneva,
who lifted 7.3 million barrels at a profit of more than $1.5 million
and Boutros’ brother-in-law, Fred Nadler, who acted as a “good
friend and intermediary” to everybody involved in the oil-for-food
thieving. He shares lawyers who are relatives of Abdelnour.
To which august gathering we can add Kofi’s son, Kojo, who helped sell
2 million barrels of Iraqi oil to a Moroccan company for about $60
million. Kojo was employed by the company that monitored “humanitarian”
supplies imported into Iraq.
And, announcing these findings, the astute and trustworthy Volcker
said that no smoking gun was found. To which, let’s add, that
Annan’s spokesman is talking about “immunity for prosecution for
secretary-generals,” which can be awarded by the U.N. Security Council.
Dateline D.C. is written by a Washington-based British journalist
and political observer.

PRESS OFFICE
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern)
630 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Contact: Jake Goshert, Coordinator of Information Services
Tel: (212) 686-0710 Ext. 60; Fax: (212) 779-3558
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
January 10, 2005
___________________
ACYOA COMPLETES SUCCESSFUL REGIONAL CONFERENCE SERIES
“Lord, I am a conductor with tired hands, smeared notes, and missing
musicians, working to bring alive the greatest symphony” — so went a
prayer written by a group of young Armenian Church members during a
recent one-day conference in Dallas, TX.
As part of the conference organized by the Armenian Church Youth
Organization of America (ACYOA), participants examined a prayer written
generations ago by St. Gregory of Narek. They were then asked to craft
their own prayer. It was just one of the activities at the ACYOA
Southern Regional Conference designed to strengthen individual ties to
God and local ACYOA chapters.
Participating in the conference — held at the St. Sarkis Church in
Dallas, TX, on Saturday, January 29, 2005 — were ACYOA members from
both the Dallas chapter and the St. Kevork Church in Houston. They
gathered to talk about their faith as well as the ACYOA organization.
“The conference far exceeded my expectations,” said Karoun Charkoudian,
a member of the St. Kevork Church. “The passionate discussions and
interactive workshops provided an open, comfortable atmosphere so that
we could all explore our feelings about Christianity as it relates to
spirituality, marriage, and sex.”
Fr. Mikael Devejian, pastor of St. Sarkis Church, and ACYOA Executive
Secertary Nancy Basmajian served as presenters at the Southern
conference.
“This was a great opportunity to discuss how God is a part of our daily
lives and also get to know one another better,” Fr. Devejian said.
The ACYOA Central Council, which sponsors an annual series of regional
conferences in four different areas, was represented at each program by
the group’s regional liaisons.
“The smaller, more intimate settings of the regional conferences allow
the participants to have in-depth discussions while focusing on their
own thoughts regarding spirituality and their individual faith
experiences,” said Maria Derderian, the ACYOA Central Council member who
attended the Southern Regional meeting. “Through witnessing their faith
and coming together in true Christian fellowship, they form a stronger
connection with each other, which then continues to strengthen their
ACYOA chapters.”
LAST IN A SERIES
The meeting in Texas was the last in the current series of regional
gatherings organized by the ACYOA.
Earlier, members in New England met on January 15, 2005, at the St.
James Church of Watertown, MA, where they heard from Fr. Arakel
Aljalian, pastor of the St. James Church; Fr. Vasken Kouzouian, pastor
of the Holy Trinity Church of Cambridge, MA; and Yn. Arpi Kouzouian,
coordinator of youth outreach for the Diocese.
Other conferences were held for members in the Midwest region on October
23, 2004, at St. John’s Church of Southfield, MI; and in the
Mid-Atlantic region on November 6, 2004, at St. Mary Church in
Livingston, NJ.
The next major event for the ACYOA will be the 6th Annual National Young
Adult Leadership Conference from February 18 to 20, 2005, at the Don
Bosco Retreat Center in Stony Point, NY. The conference is free, and
parishes are asked to send two representatives each. Parishes are also
encouraged to help their representatives cover travel costs, to ensure
as many young people as possible can attend.
A number of participants in past ACYOA National Young Adult Leadership
Conferences have gone on to serve their home parishes as parish council
members and in other leadership positions.
This year the conference will explore the theme “Fellowship: A Common
Life in Christ”. Those seeking more information are encouraged to visit
or e-mail Nancy Basmajian at [email protected].
— 2/10/05
E-mail photos available on request. Photos also viewable in the News
and Events section of the Eastern Diocese’s website,
PHOTO CAPTION (1): Participants in the ACYOA southern regional retreat
gather at the St. Sarkis Church of Dallas, TX, on Saturday, January 29,
2005.
PHOTO CAPTION (2): ACYOA members in Texas take part in a Bible study
discussion during the ACYOA southern regional retreat on Saturday,
January 29, 2005.
# # #
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

New bill to bar Armenian ombudsman from courts
Mediamax news agency
10 Feb 05
Yerevan, 10 February: The Armenian government has approved changes
to the law “On the Human Rights Defender”, which deny the ombudsman
the right to interfere in the course of court trials.
Under the new bill, the ombudsman can only consult the plaintiff on
appealing against court verdicts or sentences, the press service of
the Cabinet of Ministers reported today.
It was noted at the government’s meeting that this approach was
observed in the laws of a number of countries.

This Crisis Should be Resolved Too
By EKREM DUMANLI
Zaman, Turkey
Feb 10 2005
One cannot deny the long-term crisis in Turkish-American relations.
The tension, which began with the objection to the March 1
deployment, deepens a bit at every opportunity.
Turkey has many concerns about the developments in Northern Iraq.
Turkey’s expectation of an operation against the Kurdistan Workers’
Party (PKK) has turned into disappointment. Kurdish leaders make
provocative statements on the Kerkuk (Kirkuk) issue and the US
usually foots the bill. The idea that Iran will benefit the most from
a new Iraqi state with a Shiite majority is cause for concern…
The problem is not just limited to Iraq. The US position and Turkey’s
official discourse conflict with one another on the ecumenical
debate. Turkey wants to play a role in the Middle Eastern peace
process, but it also explicitly accuses Israel of “state terrorism.”
This position brings Turkey head to head with US foreign policy.
The magic of the diplomatic profession becomes apparent during
difficult times like these.
Turkey should continue its relations with the US on good terms and
also maintain balance in the rest of the world. Although policies
based on continuous tension straighten out over time, scars usually
remain. Diplomatic foresight allows intervention before tension
peaks.
Last week, I had the opportunity to chat with people in many places,
in particular at The Washington Post. Being in Washington was a big
advantage for a journalist just days before US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to visit Turkey. Almost everyone was
busy making preparations; almost everyone had questions; almost
everyone had their own interpretation regarding the visit.
Apparently, the US wants to get rid of its negative image that was
created during the Iraqi war and is therefore looking for solutions.
It is also clear that they want to have a closer relationship with
other countries in the world (particularly with Europe) during Bush’s
new term in presidency. The worldwide spread of anti-Americanism is
cause for tremendous concern. Anti-Americanism in Turkey has reached
80 percent according to a British Broadcast Company’s (BBC) public
survey. This finding also concerns the US.
It is hard to believe that this public survey is correct. The Turkish
public is not an enemy to the US, but it is clear that there is
concern about US policies in the Middle East. The Turkish public has
not forgotten the cooperation of Muslims and Americans in Bosnia,
Kosovo, and Somalia, the US help in the seizure of PKK leader
Abdullah Ocalan, the direct US support for European Union (EU)
membership, etc. The chain of incidents that began with the March 1
motion, however, keep tensions running high. Being on scathing terms
sometimes strengthens conspiracy theories as well. As in the famous
sack incident [when US soldiers put bags over the heads of Turkish
soldiers in Iraq], there are other incidents such as being unable to
do anything about the PKK in Northern Iraq that ferment
misunderstanding and anger.
To be honest, US-Turkey relations may face a more difficult period in
the upcoming months. For instance, the “Armenian genocide bill,”
which may ward off a final attack at any minute, might harm Turkey. A
Turkish deputy’s description of US activity in Iraq as “genocide” was
discussed and passed over by Turkish interest groups. That the US
feels unbelievable discomfort is clear enough. A deputy’s remarks are
not, in fact, binding to the Turkish government, but since relations
are built on tension, a new crisis could emerge from almost any
issue.
There are critical issues that both countries have put in the deep
freeze. These issues should be dealt with using clear minds and
diplomatic courtesy. Of course, various possibilities could bring
some opportunities to Turkey, but Turkey cannot give up its role as
America’s “strategic partner.” Turkish diplomacy has solved many
crises skillfully, and it should solve this, too. I hope Rice’s visit
to Turkey becomes a significant step toward normalized relations.
–Boundary_(ID_AtEjL18vvyiGA5r5nYt4gw)–

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
Jan 29 2005
Nixon Center Expert Baran: The U.S. Intends To Change The Status Quo
In Turkey’s Region
Anadolu Agency: 1/29/2005
WASHINGTON, D.C. (AA) – The International Security & Energy Program
Director of the Nixon Center Zeyno Baran has stated that the United
States intends to change the status quo in Turkey’s region. ”Hence,
Turkey would have to pursue a more active policy,” affirmed Baran.
Participating in a panel discussion, sponsored by the
American-Turkish Council (ATC) and Atlantic Council in Washington,
D.C., Baran referred to U.S. President’s inaugural address, where he
mentioned the importance of the spread of democracy globally, and
remarked that in such a scenario Turkey must make clear where it
stands. ”Turkey’s stance will have an impact on the strategic
partnership between Turkey and the U.S..” she said.
Baran pointed out that understanding the reasons behind the Iraq
War is crucial. ”The United States believes that the status quo in
the region created a fertile ground for the September 11 attack. The
US’s intention is clear and they want to change the structure of the
region (Middle East),” remarked Baran. -TURKEY & RUSSIA DON’T WANT
ANY CHANGE-
Baran added that the recent close relations between Turkey and
Russia indicate that the cooperation between the two countries stand
to preserve the status quo in the region. ”Both Turkey and Russia
are worried about changes in the region. They want to preserve the
status quo,” expressed Baran.
According to Baran, being a NATO member, Turkey’s relations with
Russia are a matter of concern for security experts. Baran said that
the Turkish deputies’ qualification of events in Iraq as ”genocide”
will result in a ”tough” resolution on the so-called Armenian
genocide in the U.S. congress.
Meanwhile, the American-Turkish Council (ATC) Defense & Security
Relations Committee Chairman Preston Hughes indicated that the U.S.
strongly supports Turkey’s bid to join the EU. ”It is important for
Turkey to understand that it will come under pressure by the EU. We
must not abandon our beliefs that relations between Turkey and the
USA are in the interest of both countries,” told Hughes.
Hughes elaborated that time to time disappointments may occur on
both sides. ”For example, the Turks have been disappointed with the
lack of U.S. assistance to wipe away the terrorist organization PKK
in northern Iraq. Similarly, the U.S. was disappointed with Turkey’s
decision not to help Americans open a northern front in Iraq. Despite
such disappointments, the two countries must not forget that they
share common values on democracy. We must not burn the bridges that
so closely bring us together,” stressed Hughes.

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 28 2005
PACE to mull execution of its resolution on Garabagh

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Political
Committee will mull the mechanism for executing its January 25
resolution on Upper Garabagh on Friday.
The PACE rapporteur on the Garabagh conflict David Atkinson says the
Committee should request Azerbaijan to start negotiating with the
communities of Upper Garabagh. He said that since the PACE resolution
was passed, Baku will now intensify its relations with these
communities and that relevant meetings may be held in Strasbourg.
The rapporteur said he was not aware of any dates of such meetings
but pointed out that the dialogue should begin with no
pre-conditions.*

Assyrian International News Agency
Guest Editorial
Misinformation From a Finnish Immigration Official
Dr. Eden Naby
Posted 01-28-2005, 13:01:32
(AINA) — A member of the Finnish Directorate of Immigration, Antero
Leitzinger published an article called Kurds and the Kurdistans, which
appeared on 1/23/05 at GlobalPolitician.com. The article appeared so
outrageous to a Kurdish supporter that this person called it to the
attention of Dr. Eden Naby, Academic Advisor to the Assyrian Academic
Society. The article below is Dr. Naby’s editorial for AINA
critiquing the misinformation that the author has knowingly or
unwittingly passed into the public domain about Assyrians (ed.).
I am truly appalled at the shallowness of the analysis, lack of
comparative data, and simple (mischievous?) twisting of facts in the
article on Kurds and the Kurdistans, which appeared on 1/23/05 by
Antero Leitzinger at GlobalPolitician.com. In the age of the Internet,
thankfully, one cannot get away with such low quality work. Facts are
easy to check, and propaganda cannot so easily pass for expert
knowledge.
Not only does this author persist on weighing “oranges” against
“apples” and coming up with useless analogies (Scandinavians, divided
into several countries, cannot be equated with Kurds, nor can Turks be
equated with the distant Uighurs of Central Asia, whatever the
language affinities may be), but he treats lightly areas of cultural
history that are very complex
But this is not his most egregious mistake. No, in his references to
Assyrians your editors should not have let pass the absolute
historical and linguistic misinformation being passed along by Kurdish
extremists to unsuspecting western sources: Can Global Politician
maintain its integrity if it presents such appallingly unbalanced
material?
Assyrians have never been “Kurds.” Nor are Jews who lived in northern
Iraq “Kurds.” From reliable Israeli accounts, there are no more than
100 Jews left in all of Iraq, and most of those are in Baghdad and
Basra. The Jewish religious and cultural facilities in places like
Mosul and especially the large village of Alqosh on the Nineveh Plain
have been looked after by the local ChaldoAssyrians once the Jews
finally got permission to flee to Israel after 1949. Assyrians and
Jews in Iraq, because they shared religious status as dhimmis – barely
tolerated non-Muslims – and a common Aramaic speaking heritage,
maintained a close relationship. One of the earliest books published
about Jews in Iraq is by an Assyrian (Ghanima, 1927).
Whatever the new strategic relationship between Iraq’s Kurds and the
Israelis and Americans may be, let us not gloss over the fact that
most Jews living in northern Iraq are today in Israel or somewhere out
of Iraq. Just because they spoke Kurdish does not mean that they were
Kurds. Many minorities speak multiple languages of necessity, even as
a mother language, of necessity. Look at the Uzbek elites or the
Kazakhs who still are more comfortable in Russian than in their own
written languages. Imagine the situation in northern Iraq where Jews
and Assyrians spoke modern forms of Aramaic but of necessity also
communicated in Kurdish, Arabic and in some cases Turkish and
Persian. That is the state of minorities. It is an injustice to parlay
multilingualism into Kurdish ethnicity and deny the existence of
special ethnic minorities who already suffer enough physically and
culturally.
In terms of religion therefore, Kurds do not include many religions.
Absolutely not. They are Muslims of several stripes. Assyrians are
Christians separated into several denominations. The language of
Assyrian church liturgy is Syriac, and sometimes the modern Aramaic
vernacular. If in some churches the knowledge of Aramaic has decreased
due to its suppression in schools, and Arabic, Turkish and even
Kurdish are adopted to carry on the Christian tradition, this does not
make these people Kurds. Aramaic is the oldest continuously written
and spoken language of the Middle East and second only to Chinese in
the entire world. It is on the verge of joining the dead languages of
the world like Latin precisely because of the kinds of persecution
that Christians in parts of the Muslim world have experienced.
In Iraq, northwest Iran and in eastern Turkey, the biggest direct
physical pressure on the Assyrians came from the Kurds, historically
and today. Antero Leitzinger should have reflected a bit more, and
read a great deal more about the First World War in the Middle East
before repeating Kurdish propaganda about who persecuted whom. Written
records alone, of Kurdish attacks on Assyrian villages, go back to the
mid-19th century. They culminated in World War I when Kurds
persistently attacked Urmiyah at a time when the Iranian government
was too weak (caught up in the Constitutional Revolution) to resist
either the Tsarist or Ottoman armies. Kurds took advantage of this
weakness to kill off Assyrians and Armenians in persistent pulses
sweeping down from the Zagros foothills onto the plains of Urmiyah. In
1914, just as the Ottomans joined the Central Powers, their Kurdish
allies launched an attack on Margawar and Targawar, killing all who
could not flee east to relative shelter. In 1915 when the Committee
of Union and Progress (CUP) launched its jihad in earnest against the
Armenians, Assyrians and Pontic Greeks, driving who they could not
kill into the Syrian desert, due to the Kurdish Hamidiya paramilitary
units, very few, less than 50,000 Assyrians managed to reach Urmiyah
since the mountain passes were held by Kurds who had taken over
Margawar and Targawar already. The events of WWI culminated in the
assassination of the Kurdish Shakkak tribe’s honored dinner guest, the
Assyrian Patriarch, titled Mar Shim’un at that time, in 1918; about
130 of Mar Shim’un’s bodyguards were also murdered. Some allege the
after dinner assassination took place because the Kurdish chieftain
Isma’el Agha (Simku) coveted this Assyrian leader’s ring. (Anzali,
1999)
Kurds have also coveted Assyrian and Armenian women, and being in a
more religiously powerful position as Muslims, they have taken these
women and girls as household servants or second wives with little that
their Christian neighbors could do to prevent it, although trying to
get the women back periodically occurred and as late as the 1960s got
whole Christian villages destroyed (August Thiery, 2003). The
offspring of such forced unions may be partly Assyrian, but ethnically
and culturally they grew up Kurds. And Muslims. Forget racial purity
in that part of the Middle East: what matters for identity is
language, religion and heritage.
Due to the polygamous marriages so popular among peasant and
non-peasant Kurds, the rate of population increase among Kurds is one
of the highest in the world although population figures are
notoriously unreliable and we only have the sample Soviet censuses to
provide some evidence. One recent New Yorker article (October 2004)
noted that among the Kurds moving into Kirkuk was a man with two wives
and 21 children! He was interviewed at random. The upshot of all this
is that the villages in Iran identified as Assyrian in 1927 were
reduced drastically in number by the time of the official Iranian
census published in the early 1950s (Razmara). And take a guess as to
who had replaced the Assyrian Christians in and around Urmiyah? Mainly
Kurds, not Azaris. Maybe Antero Leitzinger should have read a little
more about why the Mahabad Republic was located where it was in WWII,
instead of simply wondering why it was not in “Kordestan.”
The same displacement process occurred in southeast Turkey, in
northeast Syria and now with help from misinformation like that
provided in Global Politician, on the Nineveh Plains in northern
Iraq. These replacements are genuine Kurds, not of the variety your
author is presenting as “Christian Kurds” and “Jewish Kurds.”
These ethnic and religious matters in the Middle East are not
simple. To try to deal with them from a biased perspective, or to
create untenable analogies, only leads to disastrously tragic policy
decisions. Global political astuteness requires far greater diligence
and care.
Ethnic cleansing is no joking matter. Careless words can wipe out the
Assyrians, one of the oldest surviving communities in the world. The
culture of the Assyrians of the Middle East is precious in all the
senses of that word: it is old, rich, increasingly fragile, and has
made many contributions to world culture from medicine (Le Coz, 2004)
to agriculture (Abdalla 1980s, 1990s articles) and all the fields of
human knowledge between them. To relegate the Assyrians to a branch of
Kurds, who, for whatever reason, have a low prestige culture and
little written history, is a cultural crime. At the least your author
and you [globalpolitician.com] need to make a retraction.
—
Dr. Eden Naby is a cultural historian on the modern Middle East with a
concentration on the area from Iraq to Central Asia. She has published
extensively on Assyrians, as well as the Afghans, Turkmens, Uighurs
and Kurds. Dr. Nab y’s book Afghanistan: Mullah, Marx And Mujahid
(Westview Press, rpt. 2002), co-authored with the Prof. Ralph
H. Magnus, is a seminal source on modern Afghanistan and particularly
useful for its analysis of that country’s ethnic and religious
minorities. Her most recent writing about Assyrians is From Lingua
Franca to Endangered Language: The Legal Aspects of the Preservation
of Aramaic in Iraq, a paper in On The Margins Of Nations: Endangered
Languages And Language Rights (Joan A. Argenter and R. McKenna Brown,
ed., 2004).
Views and opinions expressed in guest editorials do not necessarily
reflect the views and opinions of AINA. Guest Editorial Policy
Copyright (C) 2005, Assyrian International News Agency. All Rights
Reserved.

Agence France Presse
27 janvier 2005 jeudi 6:13 PM GMT
L’Italie aidera l’Arménie à se rapprocher de l’Europe (Ciampi)
ROME
L’Italie appuiera l’Arménie dans son rapprochement de l’Union
européenne, a déclaré jeudi le président italien, Carlo Azeglio
Ciampi, en recevant son homologue arménien, Robert Kotcharian.
M. Ciampi a invité son hôte, en visite officielle pour la première
fois à Rome, à “consolider” les fondements de l’économie de marché et
à poursuivre “avec ténacité” sur la voie des réformes.
Le chef d’Etat italien a souligné que “l’Union européenne tire sa
force du fait qu’elle a surmonté les divisions du passé et de sa
vocation à construire un avenir commun entre des peuples qui
partagent la même histoire, la même culture et qui poursuivent des
intérêts communs”.
M. Kotcharian a répondu que l’aide de l’Italie serait précieuse et
tout en jugeant les rapports bilatéraux très bons, il a espéré encore
un développement des relations économiques.

BBC News, UK
Jan 25 2005
Regions and territories: Nagorno-Karabakh

Situated in south-western Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh is a richly
fertile area of striking beauty scarred by its violent history.
The word Karabakh has Turkic and Persian roots and means “black
garden”. The word Nagorno is Russian and means mountainous.
OVERVIEW
The ongoing bitter rivalry for control between ethnic Armenians and
Azeris has roots dating back well over a century into competition
between Christian Armenian and Muslim Turkic and Persian influences.
AT A GLANCE
Territory is inside Azerbaijan, but population predominantly ethnic
Armenian
War followed 1991 declaration of independence; up to 30,000 were
killed, more than one million fled their homes
Ceasefire was signed in 1994, but peace talks are bogged down and
refugees remain stranded
History
Populated for hundreds of years by Armenian and Turkic farmers,
herdsmen and traders, Karabakh became part of the Russian empire in
the 19th century.
Armenia insists that it was part of an early Christian kingdom,
citing the presence of ancient churches as evidence. Azeri historians
argue that the churches were built by the Caucasian Albanians, a
Christian nation whom they regard as among the forebears of the Azeri
people.
Islam arrived in the region more than a millennium ago.
For long periods Christian Armenians and Turkic Azeris lived in peace
but they were both guilty of acts of brutality in the early 20th
century. These live on in the popular memory and fuel mutual
antagonism.

There have been many deaths to mourn
The end of World War I and the aftermath of the Bolshevik revolution
in Russia brought carving up of borders. As part of their
divide-and-rule policy in the area, the Soviets established the
Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, of which the population was
predominantly ethnic Armenian, within Azerbaijan in the early 1920s.
Armenian discontent at this situation smouldered throughout the
Soviet period. Ethnic Armenian-Azeri frictions exploded into furious
violence in the late 1980s in the twilight years of the USSR.
As the violence escalated, the ethnic Azeri population fled Karabakh
and Armenia while ethnic Armenians fled the rest of Azerbaijan. With
the break-up of the Soviet Union, in late 1991, Karabakh declared
itself an independent republic. That de facto status remains
unrecognised elsewhere.
Although there was no formal declaration of war, there was
large-scale combat between Azerbaijani and ethnic Armenian forces.
That fighting ultimately brought victory for the ethnic Armenians who
then pushed on to occupy Azeri territory outside Karabakh, creating a
buffer zone linking Karabakh and Armenia.
Ceasefire but no final settlement
A Russian-brokered ceasefire was signed in 1994 leaving Karabakh de
facto under ethnic Armenian control. The deal also left swathes of
Azeri territory around the enclave in Armenian hands. No final
settlement has ever been signed. Both sides have had soldiers killed
in sporadic breaches of the ceasefire. The closure of borders with
Turkey and Azerbaijan has caused landlocked Armenia severe economic
problems for nearly 15 years.
It is estimated that between 20,000 and 30,000 people lost their
lives during half a decade of conflict, and that more than one
million fled their homes. The Azeris have yet to return to areas of
Azerbaijan now under ethnic Armenian control and have little prospect
of returning to Karabakh itself. Similarly, the Armenians who fled
Azerbaijan during the conflict have not returned there.
The ethnic Armenians who now account for virtually the entire
population of Nagorno-Karabakh prefer to call it Artsakh, an ancient
name dating back around 1,500 years.

Guns now silent, future unresolved
The situation throughout over a decade since the ceasefire agreement
has been one of simmering stalemate. Azeris bitterly resent the loss
of the land which they regard as rightfully theirs. The Armenians
show no sign of willingness to compromise or give one square
centimetre of it back.
Russia, France and the USA co-chair the OSCE’s Minsk Group which has
been attempting to broker an end to the dispute for over a decade.
In 1997 the group tabled settlement proposals seen as a starting
point for negotiations by Azerbaijan and Armenia but not by the de
facto authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh itself. When the then Armenian
president, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, tried to encourage Nagorno-Karabakh
to enter into talks he was forced to resign amid cries of betrayal.
Hopes of a peace deal were raised in 2001, after a series of meetings
between Armenian President Robert Kocharyan and Heydar Aliyev, the
late president of Azerbaijan.
However, ultimately the talks came to nothing, and contacts between
the two countries’ presidents have never looked so promising again.
FACTS
Status: de jure part of the Republic of Azerbaijan, unilaterally
declared itself an independent republic in 1991
Capital: Stepanakert/Khenkendi
Area: 4,400 sq km
Main religion: Christianity
Languages spoken: Armenian, Russian
Currency in use: Dram
LEADERS
President: Arkadiy Gukasyan
First elected president of the unrecognised republic of
Nagorno-Karabakh in 1997, Mr Gukasyan won a second term in 2002.
He survived an assassination attempt in 2000. Samuel Babayan, whom he
had recently sacked as defence minister, was convicted of organizing
the attack and sentenced to 14 years in prison.
Although Mr Gukasyan has expressed the desire for a peaceful solution
to the dispute over the republic’s status, he has pledged never to
compromise on Nagorno-Karabakh’s independence. He insists that the
unrecognised republic must have full representation at any future
negotiations on the way forward.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Boston Globe, MA
Jan 25 2005
Never again
By James Carroll | January 25, 2005
THIS WEEK marks the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
When news eventually came to America of what the Red Army found at
that death camp in January 1945, the report was remarkably detailed.

The headline of a first New York Times story about Auschwitz, filed
from Moscow on May 8, 1945, read, “Oswiecim Killings Placed at
4,000,000.” This number overstated by a factor of two the total of
those murdered at Auschwitz, yet the account seemed closely observed
in most other respects. The remains of the victims were described —
the charnel pits and piles of ashes, the corpses. The mechanized
death process was explained, with a careful description of the gas
chambers, down, even, to the name of the manufacturer of the
crematoria — Topf and Son. The identities of the victims were given
as “more than 4,000,000 citizens” of a list of European nations —
Poland, Hungary, Netherlands, France. But what is most remarkable
about the Times story — apart from the fact that it was buried on
page 12 — is that in defining the identities of those victims, the
story never used the word “Jew.”
Many non-Jewish Poles were murdered at Auschwitz, but the vast
majority of the dead were Jews — killed for being Jewish. Indeed, of
all the death camps, Auschwitz was most expressly commissioned to
murder of Jews. Yet the New York Times reporter apparently saw
nothing untoward in passing along a Soviet report that made no
mention of Jews at Auschwitz. The murdered were Dutch, or French.
They were men, women and children. They were old. They were Italian.
Nothing about their being Jewish, which for the Nazis was the only
thing that counted. The Times reporter was C. L. Sulzberger.
My attention was drawn to this story by a study of Holocaust news
coverage I conducted at the Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center for
Press, Politics and Public Policy. I discovered that after World War
II the broader world was shockingly slow in acknowledging the most
distinctive feature of the Nazi death-camp system — that, whoever
its other victims were, it was created expressly to eliminate the
Jewish people.
Yet in the war’s immediate aftermath, little attention was drawn to
the fate of the millions of Jews who died in those camps. The
desperate people released from those hell holes after liberation,
like those who had already been murdered, were routinely referred to
in governmental and journalistic reports as “resisters,” “prisoners,”
“interned civilians,” “displaced persons,” and so on.
The New York Times index did not cite stories about concentration
camps under the category “Jews” until 1950. It was not until 1975
that the index category “Nazi Policies Toward Jews” appeared.
Western culture came very slowly — and reluctantly — to a full
reckoning with what the Nazis set out to do in the heart of Europe.
The work of writers (Elie Wiesel, of course, but also the likes of
Primo Levi and Cynthia Ozick); teaching by educators (for example,
Facing History and Ourselves); the demands of heirs (challenges to
Swiss banks and art museums); the movement to establish Holocaust
museums and memorials; the recognitions tied to anniversaries,
especially as witnessing survivors aged and began to die — all of
this has helped to lay bare what makes the Nazi crime against the
Jews a matter of acute moral concern for the civilization out of
which it grew.
The Master Race ideology depended on contempt for various racial and
ethnic groups, including Slavs to the east of Germany and
Mediterranean peoples to the south. But Hitler’s anti-Jewish agenda
was unlike the impulses behind his other crimes, or other horrors of
history. To insist on this is not to engage in the competition of
victim groups, or the pointless setting of genocides against each
other, as if Polish, Armenian, or Cambodian suffering weighs less
than Jewish suffering.
What gives the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz its special
gravity is that this crime, while committed by Nazis — and the
particular guilt of the perpetrators must always be insisted upon —
could not have occurred but for the religiously and culturally
justified anti-Semitism that both spawned the crime and then enabled
it nearly to succeed. Therefore, the word “Auschwitz” stands now not
merely as a marker of the evil that gripped Germany for a time, but
also as an ongoing challenge to the conscience of the broader culture
whose, yes, complicity was hinted at in the way it at first deflected
the most important thing about the horror that had unfolded there.
James Carroll’s column appears regularly in the Globe.