Author: Hambardsumian Paul

Town Hall, DC
Jan 29 2005

Packed, Stacked and Ready to Whack
Doug Giles (archive)

Our Constitution is currently under a greater threat than a teenaged
boy at a Michael Jackson sleepover. Yes, this rock solid
foundational document, a major cause of our country’s amazing
success, is undergoing some serious thrashing by judges, bureaucrats,
politicians, prosecutors and police. I don’t know about you … but I
do not like the fact that the very people who should uphold our
rights are stretching them thinner than Fiona Apple on a rack.

One of the basic human rights that constantly has to be defended is
the right to keep and bear arms. Why did the original founders of
this great American experiment toss this given, no-duh, entitlement
into the Constitution? Well … it wasn’t so that we would be
guaranteed that we could hunt squirrels and woodchucks without
serving time, as great as that is. It was for the purpose of
defending ourselves against perps when the cops are running a little
late, and for the purpose of protecting ourselves against the
government should the system go south.

What concerns me is how both the Federal and State governments,
driven by rabid lawmakers, continue to be such a pain in the derriere
with respect to the right to possess a firearm. In just a few short
years, our supposed Constitution-honoring government has made it
grueling to obtain, practically impossible to carry, and God help you
if you actually legitimately have to use … a gun.

Listen … Pollyanna … it’s a bad bad day and the potential beginning
of a serious nightmare when the government forbids you to buy, or
tries to take from you, your weapon.

This is one of the major lessons history screams at us.

For those of you who missed your world history classes because you
were taking transgender sensitivity training, let me highlight a few
ignoble moments in the world’s gun-ridding record.

Take Germany for example. Soon after WWI, the liberal powers thought
that relieving citizens of their rifles would restore peace in the
streets. The general populace bought this nonsense because at that
time there were no astute bloggers, Fox News, NRA or ClashRadio.com
to shoot down such a stupid idea. And for a while, no doubt, I’m
sure everyone felt warm and fuzzy.

The warm and fuzzy feelings, however, gave way to cold hard reality
when the Austrian Jerk Emeritus goose-stepped his way into power and
began to unfold his Mein Crap. This was relatively easy for Adolf to
do. Why was his big lie easy to sell? One major reason was that the
ones who were not buying his crack really couldn’t do squat about it
… because, you see … they had allowed the government to seize their
weapons just a few short years prior to The Dipstick’s ascent.

Sure, they could and did resist as much as possible, but when dealing
with a tyrant, sometimes the only way to communicate your displeasure
with his dementia is with the crack of gun fire. Unfortunately, the
dissenters were, by and large, weaponless. The only ones allowed to
own firearms were Hitler, his wizards and the ones who danced to his
tortuous tune.

And for those who need more examples of how a disarmed populace
stands more vulnerable than Ashlee Simpson before a Bose voice
processor … let’s see … what massive slaughter of unarmed citizens
should I use to hammer the point further home? How about how the
Turks systematically disarmed and then slaughtered, plus or minus,
one million Armenians back in the early 1900’s? Or the
`disarm-oppress-and kill’ campaigns executed by bad leaders upon the
innocent people of Cambodia, the Soviet Union, China, Sudan, Rwanda,
Uganda, Indonesia, Iran, and Iraq?

How’s that?

As Judge Andrew Napolitano points out in his book, Constitutional
Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws, nowhere
in the annals of world history do an unarmed people ever fare well.
Never has an act of genocide in the 20th century occurred where the
citizens were packing. I guarantee that if the Gestapo had been
strafed with 180 grain 30/06 lead, or pounded repeatedly at close
range with 00buck from 12 gauge riot gun … the numbers lost during
that crazy crew’s reign of terror would have been far, far less. But
the GP acquiesced in peacetime to the bad idea of giving up their
guns to quell violence, obviously never imagining that their
government would ever go bad. But it did. And once it did … the
unarmed citizens were slaughtered by the armed government. Judge
Kozinski framed it nicely: `Tyranny thrives best where the government
doesn’t fear the wrath of armed people.’

My ClashPoint is this: I’m sure some reflexively irate idealist is
thinking that that was then and this is now and there is no way such
atrocities will ever happen again, and that John Lennon’s vision for
the world will not just be imagined, but actualized.

That’s cool.

I’m ready for the lion to lay down with the lamb; however, in this
waiting period between now and when Xanadu actually manifests, I’m
not giving up my right to keep and bear arms while looking solely to
the government to cover my back. Our framers got it right: armed
people are free people. As much as I laud, appreciate, and look to
our Constitution-honoring soldiers and law enforcers to serve and
protect me and my house, I also know it is my right and my duty to be
packed, stacked and ready to whack just in case things get loopy.

Doug Giles’ provocative weekly one-hour radio program, ‘The Clash’,
has re-launched with several new features. Go to clashradio.com and
hit ‘listen live.’

TURKISH SCHOLARS SEEK TO ENGAGE ARMENIAN COUNTERPARTS IN HISTORICAL DEBATE

Civil Society

EurasiaNet.org
2/01/05

By Igor Torbakov

As Turkey prepares for what promises to be a lengthy European Union
accession process, officials in Ankara are striving to remove obstacles
that stand in the way of their integration ambitions. Accordingly,
authorities appear to be welcoming a research project by Turkish
historians designed to shed additional light on the circumstances
surrounding the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians from 1915-1923.

Armenian leaders have campaigned for international recognition of what
they insist was genocide committed by Turkish forces amid the chaos of
the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Yerevan’s calls have received
support in the capitals of some influential EU capitals, in particular
France, which has a sizeable Armenian émigré population.

In early January, the Turkish Historical Society – a semi-official
institution founded in the beginning of the 1930s – announced that it
had finished a large research project commenced in 2001. The result of
the historical exploration is four volumes of documents in which `the
allegations made by Armenians are answered one by one,’ according to a
Turkish journalist familiar with the research. The project marks the
first comprehensive attempt by Turkish scholars to challenge the
Armenian version of the tragic events of the past.

Armenian officials and historians assert that the Young Turk government
in power in Istanbul in 1915 ordered the systematic slaughter of
Armenians. Turkish leaders have insisted the mass deaths of Armenians
did not constitute genocide, alleging that Armenians were largely
victims of a vicious partisan struggle during and after World War I.

The authors of the recent four-volume study appear to endorse the
mainstream Turkish view of events. They also advocate the continuation
of research, calling for a multi-national inquiry into the events.
Professor Yusuf Halacoglu, head of the Turkish Historical Society, said
in a January 12 interview with the Reuters news agency that the
commission should comprise scholars from Turkey, Armenia, the United
States, France and Britain.

Turkey is due to start EU accession negotiations on October 3, while on
April 24 Armenians throughout the world will mark the 90th anniversary
of what they call the `first genocide of the 20th century.’ Many Turkish
officials and experts believe Yerevan may attempt to engage Ankara in a
`battle over history.’ According to Turkish media reports, commemoration
activities will include conferences, meetings, exhibitions and new
publication projects. A few Turkish commentators are urging the Turkish
government to adopt a more pro-active stance in the ongoing debate.
`Saying `we never committed genocide’ is no longer enough. We will be
forced to pay the price for inactivity. We need to do something,’ wrote
Mehmet Ali Birand in a commentary published by the Turkish Daily News on
January 4.

Right after EU leaders agreed last December to open accession talks with
Turkey, both the European Parliament and France, urged Turkey to
recognize the 1915-1923 killings of Armenians as genocide. `We will
raise all the matters, including the Armenian genocide, to hear Turkey’s
response in the course of accession negotiations, which will be very
long and very difficult,’ French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier was
quoted as saying.

Halacoglu, the Turkish historian, believes that France’s stance can be
viewed as an `opportunity.’ `Armenian and Turkish historians should sit
down and debate the matter,’ he said in a December 15 interview
published in the daily Milliyet. `This has nothing to do with the EU.
Let the historians resolve the matter.’

Such a direct dialog on the `genocide’ issue between Turkish and
Armenian historians actually began last year when researchers from the
Turkish Historical Society and their colleagues from Armenian Academy of
Sciences and Yerevan’s Genocide Museum formed the so-called Vienna
Armenian-Turkish Historians’ Platform (VAT). At VAT’s first meeting held
in Austrian capital in July 2004, the two sides started exchanging
archival documents pertaining to the events of 1915-1923. But VAT’s next
meeting, reportedly scheduled for last December, was cancelled. And in
mid-January, the Anatolia news agency reported that a VAT meeting due to
take place in May 2005 had also been cancelled.

Whatever the reason for VAT’s difficulties, it appears that the work of
this bilateral forum has virtually come to a standstill. This may
explain why Turkish researchers and pundits urge the formation of an
international commission of inquiry. This commission, in Halacoglu’s
opinion, would ideally work under the auspices of the United Nations, or
another international body, to help ensure impartiality and to encourage
all states to open up their archives to the panel. `The Armenian
archives, which are closed, should also be opened to the public,’
Halacoglu said.

The idea of forming an international commission appears to be part of
Ankara’s broader strategy of seeking rapprochement with Armenia. As
Birand points out, `If these [`genocide’] studies are initiated, we will
gain time. In addition, while this process continues, Turkey can broaden
its economic relations with Armenia and open the border gate.’

In the meantime, however, Turkish historians are getting ready to debate
their Armenian colleagues on the basis of their latest research.
Speaking January 5 on the CNN-Turk television program, Hikmet Ozdemir,
head of the Turkish Historical Society’s Armenian Desk, said a publicity
campaign would be launched in February.

Editor’s Note: Igor Torbakov is a freelance journalist and researcher
who specializes in CIS political affairs. He holds an MA in History from
Moscow State University and a PhD from the Ukrainian Academy of
Sciences. He was Research Scholar at the Institute of Russian History,
Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; a Visiting Scholar at the Kennan
Institute, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington
DC; a Fulbright Scholar at Columbia University, New York; and a Visiting
Fellow at Harvard University. He is now based in Istanbul, Turkey.

[31-01-2005 ‘Karabagh Conflict’]
————————————————- ———————
BAKU IS OPEN FOR DIALOGUE WITH THE ARMENIANS OF MOUNTAINOUS KARABAGH
Source : `Zerkalo’ newspaper (Azerbaijan)
Author: R. Mirkadirov

But only after liberation of the occupied territories, Deputy Foreign
Minister Araz Azimov states.

OSCE mission, currently in Baku, will study illegal settlement of
population on occupied territories of Azerbaijan. As `Trend’ agency
reports, facts gathered by official Baku were presented to the Mission
at January 28 meeting in MFA.

Personal representative of current OSCE Chairman, Anjey Kasprshik and
OSCE experts participated in the meeting. “During our discussions with
Azerbaijani representatives, we studied a great number of
materials. At present, we have to investigate’, Russian Co-chairman of
Minsk Group, Yuri Merzlakov informed the journalists after the
meeting.

In accordance with the agreement of the Mission with official Baku,
the experts will visit all the 7 regions around Mountainous
Karabagh. In this respect, Y. Merzlakov pointed out that no
Azerbaijani representative will accompany the mission in the trip.

As a reminder, the mission includes experts from Finland, Italy,
Sweden and Germany, alongside the co-chairmen. Head of the mission is
representative of German MFA, expert on OSCE issues, Emilia Margaret.

Today, January 29, the Mission will leave for Armenia and further on
to occupied territories. According to French Co-chairman of OSCE
Minsk Group, Bernard Fassier, the Mission will work on the occupied
territories for over a week. “Later on, the experts will prepare a
technical report to submit it to the Co-chairmen. In case of
necessity, the co-chairmen will make a statement about the studied
facts”, B. Fassier said.

Settlement of the population on occupied territories of Azerbaijan is
implemented with direct involvement of Armenia. As `Turan’ reports,
Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan declared about it at yesterday’s
press conference, commenting on the results of the January 27 meeting
in MFA of OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairmen with the members of the
International Mission on establishing facts about populating the
occupied territories.

In the course of the meeting, the Azerbaijani side presented to the
Mission video and audio materials, serving as evidence of populating
the occupied territories, geographic maps. According to A. Azimov,
about 23 thousand people are illegally settled on the occupied
territories. The populating policy is implemented in various forms, up
to implementation of target economic and infrastructure projects.

The mission was also provided with the information on using the
occupied territories for illegal drug traffic and organized criminal
activity.

A. Azimov also expressed his attitude towards PACE resolution on
Mountainous Karabagh. He emphasized the objective reflection the
resolution provides on the issue of occupation of Azerbaijani
territories and ethnic cleansing. The diplomat stated that current
negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia discuss the issues of
suspension of the military conflict and elimination of its
consequences. Based on the results of the discussions, an agreement is
to be drafted and signed A. Azimov continued.

In due time, the negotiation will include discussions with the
representatives of the Armenian community of Mountainous Karabagh,
together with the Azerbaijani community, returned by the time. “In the
course of discussing the issue of the communities, Azerbaijani
government will hold discussions with its citizens and the society
should perceive it”, A. Azimov stated.

`Turan’ reports that yesterday President Ilham Aliev received OSCE
Minsk Group Co-chairmen and the Mission on establishing facts about
illegal settlement on occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

Besides, he pointed out that illegal settlement of the population on
the occupied territories by the Armenian side is one of most serious
obstacles on the way to a long-term peace. I. Aliev expressed
confidence that the Mission’s studying of the real situation on the
occupied territories will impede Armenia’s illegal activity on these
territories.

[29-01-2005 ‘Karabagh Conflict’]
———————————————————————-
VAHAN HOVHANNISSIAN DOES NOT THINK THAT THE ARMENIAN DIPLOMACY WAS DEFEATED
Source : `Azg’ newspaper (Armenia)
Author: Tatul Hakobian

Vice-Speaker of the Armenian National Assembly Vahan Hovhannisian
believes that the PACE document on Mountainous Karabagh contains a
number of unpleasant, dangerous definitions. `But the most dangerous
thing is that David Atkinson blames the Minsk Group for everything”,
Hovhannisian said yesterday in National Press Club.

In the interview given to BBC Atkinson noted with regret that the
10-year activity of Minsk Group turned out to be useless: `As the past
ten years have shown, the efforts of the Minsk Conference turned out
to be insufficient. And we thought that we might have definite ideas
that can be used in the Minsk process to resolve the conflict. I have
stressed repeatedly that the proposals that we make on behalf of the
Council of Europe are not a replacement for the Minsk Group and will
certainly not damage its cause. We only aim at expanding the Minsk
process’.

Vahan Hovhannisian, who represents `Dashnaktsutiun’ party, reminds
that since 1998 not a single proposal was dismissed by Armenia – even
if accepted with reservations. Thus, according to Hovhannisian, OSCE
cannot be at fault. Azerbaijan realized that when specialized
structures deal with Karabagh issue, it loses ground. For this reason,
Hovhanissian says, Baku tries to move the issue to other organizations
that have not been specialized in Karabagh conflict; besides, in the
Council of Europe Azerbaijan has Turkey and a number of other
countries at its side.

Hovhannissian found a part of the interview to be particularly
unacceptable – the one in which the British MP said: `Obviously the
authorities of Azerbaijan will never agree to the independence of
Karabagh. For this reason the Council of Europe cannot assist the
independence of Mountainous Karabagh’.

`How do you know’ was the rhetoric question asked by the Vice-Speaker
of the National Assembly, who added that by this statement Atkinson
did not only defend the Azerbaijani position but allows it to make its
stance stronger.

Hovhannisian also noted that the PACE document has a number of parts
favoring Armenia, but ‘they are merely parts’. In particular, the
Vice-Speaker welcomes the section in which the Azerbaijani authorities
are called on to establish contacts and dialogue with the
administration of Karabagh. `We would be glad to contribute to this
dialogue here in Strasbourg’, Atkinson said in his interview to BBC.

The Vice-President of the National Assembly, while acknowledging the
overall negative nature of the document for Armenia, does not think
the Armenian parliamentary diplomacy was defeated.

Hovhannisian supposes that Armenia and Karabagh must not object to the
visit of fact finding mission to territories controlled by Mountainous
Karabagh. NA Vice-Speaker reminded that on this territories Armenian
refugees from Baku, Sumgait, Dashkesan and other districts of
Azerbaijan currently reside. `What should these people do? If this
(settlement at these territories) is a crime, then nothing has changed
in the world since the 20th century’, he said.

The representative of `Dashnaktsutiun’ party thinks the
non-involvement of the Mountainous Karabagh in the process to be
conventional, rather – `the Karabagh party was uninvolved in one stage
of the negotiations process’, when in Paris and key West the
unification of Karabagh and Armenia was discussed, however, Aliev
Sr. later went back on his promise. Naturally, Hovhannissian said,
Karabagh party must take an active part at this stage of negotiations.

[28-01-2005 ‘Region’]
———————————————————————-
TURKISH BUSINESS `ON THE LOOSE’ IN THE BLACK SEA
Source : `Akhali Taoba’ newspaper (Georgia)
Author: Mamuka Bakashvili

Since the day of coming to power, the new government of Georgia has
promised the society to fully promote development of the national
business. Many people, having believed this promise, started restoring
the deserted industries but they immediately faced the familiar red
tape, a no less common problem of `roof’ and other barriers.

Murman Kharabadze, for restoration of fish processing factory, has
invested 1 million dollars, without involving the Georgian
government. His company `Kapadokia’ produces fish oil and
flour. `Kapadokia’ produce is on great demand in Turkey. At the
initial stage, the business thrived despite traditional problems of a
Georgian entrepreneur. However, a much more serious problem soon
emerged – the water area of Poti was suddenly navigated by Turkish
fishing seiners. Their hot and rapid activity led to closure of two
Georgian fish processing factories. Kharabdze has serious concerns
over the future of his `Kapadokia’. In his opinion, Turkish fishermen
get rich at the expense of the Georgian ones. `Turkish fishing
vessels penetrate our waters with the help of Georgian intermediary
firms. The intermediary gets about 50 thousand USD for each vessel. It
is very little money compared to the profit the Turks get’, Kharabadze
declared to `Akhali Taoba’ newspaper.

The khamsa caught in Poti waters is sold in Turkey for 4 USD per kilo,
whereas Georgia gets only 2% of total cost for its own fish caught by
the Turkish seiners, and the Turks get the rest 98%. Georgian
government recently raised taxes on the resources (khamsa in this case
is viewed as a resource) from 7 to 25 lari per tone. However, tax
rising primarily hit the poor Georgian fishermen, whereas the more
well-to-do southern neighbors could fully afford it. The experts
already counted: if the Turkish fishermen do not reduce the intensity
of their activity, in 2-3 years there may be no khamsa left in Poti
region.

Murman Kharabadze asserts that if the government puts an end to the
actually uncontrolled activity of Turkish fishing companies and
enables its fishermen to supply the fish processing factories with
their produce, the state profit from the taxes and reduction of the
production prime cost may increase fourfold. Besides, new job places
may emerge, which is of no small importance to Georgia. Kharabadze
confirms the calculations, bringing the example of his own enterprise.

He applied to the Ministry of Environmental Protection with the
request to provide a catch quota for 18 thousand tones of khamsa. He
has to pay for it 25 lari per tone to the budget, which totally makes
450 thousand lari. Besides, as a result of processing of 18 thousand
raw produce the enterprise will get 2800 tone of fish flour and 1440
tones of fish oil. The profit from sale of these products will make
1,5 million dollars. About 40% of this sum will be allotted to the
budget in form of taxes. `The Turks pay only for the caught khamsa,
whereas the main profit goes to their own country’, Murman Kharabadze
says.

However, the problems of Georgian fishermen do not appear to concern
anyone. In particular, head of Georgian sea transport administration
Valerian Imnaishvili ordered to launch 37 more Turkish vessels to Poti
water area. Considering the fact that each seiner, as a rule, is
accompanied by 2-3 transporting vessels, it may be counted that up to
100 Turkish vessels will soon be navigating the Poti waters. Georgian
fishermen are horrified – there will not be enough khamsa for them.

Valerian Imnaishvili explained to `Akhali Taoba’ newspaper that the
Turkish vessels expected in Poti waters navigate under Georgian
flag. However this does not stop the caught fish and future incomes
from going to Turkey?! Georgian ecologists pay attention to the
circumstance that the nets of the Turkish fishermen are much larger
than the Georgian ones, which should become a separate topic for
discussion. Besides, the Turks thoroughly sort the caught fish,
throwing the off-grade fish, according to their standards, right into
the sea. The Georgian ecologists assert that the Turkish standards
view as proper no more that 20% of the caught fish, whereas the
discarded 80% rot in the sea, obviously damaging the
environment. Meanwhile, the Georgian fishermen use all the fish
caught.

The Turkish partner of Murman Kharabadze, Altan Izim is also against
Turkish vessels in Georgian waters, `I am a Turk but I want to do
something for Georgia. The state should also help us in it, given the
fact that a million dollars are invested in our enterprise. The
Turkish coastline is more than 2 thousand kilometers. However, there
is practically no fish left there. Therefore, the Turkish vessels
enter the Georgian waters. We almost have to ask them for leaving us
at least 20-30 thousand tones of khamsa for our enterprise to
function. However, this situation cannot last long. Mass `attack’ of
Turkish seiners will result in disappearance of khamsa in Georgian
waters as well’.

The situation is so serious and threatening that the Georgian
fishermen decided to impede the Turkish vessels from entering the Poti
water area. They are ready to block the port of Poti. The problem
caught the attention of Georgian Parliament and a special hearing was
held there on this issue. At the session, the Chairman of the
Parliamentary Committee on Protection of the Environment and Natural
Resources Tamaz Khidesheli promised the fishermen that the Turkish
vessels will not be allowed to Poti waters. However, time showed that
the promise was nothing more than a promise. At present, the Georgian
fishermen are ready to defend their interests by their own forces and
possibilities.

[25-01-2005 ‘Armenia-Turkey’]
———————————————————————-
YEREVAN: WE RECOGNIZE THE KARS TREATY. ANKARA: WE
ARE WAITING FOR ACTIONS, NOT WORDS TO PROVE IT
Source : `Zaman’ newspaper (Turkey)
Author: Jumaly Onal, Suleyman Kurt

As Armenian Foreign Minister Oskanian stated in his interview to
`Zaman’ newspaper, Armenia recognizes the Kars Treaty, thus meeting
the condition put forward by Turkey.

Armenian Minister, answering the questions of `Zaman’, noted that for
Armenia Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s statement on Kars Treaty,
defining the borders between the two countries, was
unexpected. Oskanian, declaring that none of Armenian leaders has yet
questioned the validity of this agreement, stated, `We are one of the
countries-assignees of the Soviet Union. All the agreements, signed
between the Soviet Union and the third countries, are invalid.’

A high-ranking official in the interview to `Zaman’ characterized
Oskanian’s words as a `statement smelling of opportunism’. According
to the Turkish diplomat, `Armenian Constitution and the Declaration of
Independence refer to the eastern regions of Turkey as `Western
Armenia’. Ararat is depicted on the State Emblem. Armenia, through
the Armenian Diaspora, keeps putting accusations to Turkey of
committing the so-called Genocide. No concrete steps were taken
towards liberation of the occupied Armenian territories.
Reconciliation may be discussed only after concrete steps in these
three directions.’

The statement made by Prime Minister Erdogan on January 12 upon return
from Moscow concerned the Kars Treaty and the necessity for concrete
steps of Yerevan for opening of the border between Turkey and
Armenia. Foreign Minister of Armenia Vartan Oskanian answered the
questions of `Zaman’ on a large specter of issues, starting form the
Kars Treaty up to the accusations of the so-called Genocide.

– Prime Minister Erdogan stated that Armenia does not recognize the
Kars Treaty, and it is one of the obstacles on the way to
normalization of relations. Why doesn’t Armenia recognize this treaty?

– For me this statement of Prime Minister on Kars Treaty is fully
unexpected. No Armenian leader has ever declared about ignoring this
Treaty by Yerevan. We are one of the countries-assignees of the
Soviet Union. All the treaties, concluded between the Soviet Union and
the third countries, are valid until the new agreements, replacing the
old ones, are signed or a declaration about non-recognition of these
treaties is made.

– What is your attitude to the Turkey’s condition on suspension of
Armenian occupation of the Azerbaijani territories?

– Turkey cannot reduce the Mountainous Karabagh problem exclusively to
the territorial aspect. The issue is manifold: territory, refugees,
security, stability. The main problem is the status. Prior to Karabagh
problem between Azerbaijan and Armenia, there were no Azerbaijani
territories under Armenian control. The Armenian control over these
territories was settled as a result of Karabagh conflict. The Turkish
side does not have a clear perception of the cause and effect
relation. It is impossible to attempt solving this problem, separating
the cause from the effect. The problem is that Baku does not make any
steps on the way to discussion of the issues. Consequently, Turkey is
unable to put any territorial problems as a precondition. We aspire to
solving the problem, however, we hold that it should be viewed in a
complex.

– What is your opinion about Turkey’s becoming a mediator in Karabagh
problem?

– As Turkey is an interested party, it cannot be a mediator in
resolution of Karabagh problem. Thus, Russia has no preconditions on
the conflict resolution; therefore it is neutral, whereas Turkey
expressed its interest many times. If Turkey reconsiders its positions
on the issue of diplomatic relations, its mediation will be of large
significance. We constantly participate in bilateral meetings, however
the issue of mediation is in another plane.

Russian-Turkish Cooperation Will Not Facilitate the Solution

– How will Ankara’s cooperation with Russia impact the solution of the
problem?

– Discussion of the issue by Turkey and Russia does not worry us,
however I don’t think that joint steps of these two countries will
facilitate the solution.

– One-fifth of Azerbaijani territory is occupied by Armenia. When will
this occupation be over?

– Mountainous Karabagh has always been an Armenian territory. The
problem of other territories is the problem of Karabagh and
Azerbaijan. In USSR times, Karabagh was under Azerbaijani
control. However, when the war started between Azerbaijan and
Karabagh, Armenia naturally helped Karabagh. The reason for the
issue’s discussion between Armenia and Azerbaijan is that Azerbaijani
side does not wish to sit at negotiations table with Karabagh.

– Are the territories or compensation from Turkey the end goal of your
Genocide accusations put to Turkey, in which you aspire to get the
support of the West and primarily USA?

– Look at the map. You can see Turkey’s geography, economy,
population, whereas Armenia is a small and poor country. Our foreign
policy agenda excludes territorial claims or compensation. We just
aspire to recognition of the Genocide by the international community
and Turkey. The events of 1915 are open genocide. The opinions of the
Turkish side differ on this issue. Let people openly discuss this
issue. We are democracies. No need to worry about Armenians’ including
this issue on the agenda of third countries. The Turks may also
conduct lobbying activity in other countries. However, Armenia has
never proposed Turkey’s recognition of the Genocide as a precondition
for normalization of relations between the two countries. The issue
may be resolved by a dialogue. Without diplomatic relations in place
what solution may be offered to this problem? When no solution is
proposed on the governmental level, the search is started through
other channels.

– Do you think Turkey will recognize the genocide for the sake of
accession to EU?

– There are two important problems in our relations with Turkey:
opening of the borders and Genocide. Recognition of the Genocide is
not a precondition for normalization of the relations but opening of
the borders is naturally essential. There can be no proper relations
between the countries with closed borders. However, the relations
between these two countries may be normalized even without Genocide
recognition. We included the problem of border opening in EU agenda,
whereas the Genocide problem is of a more general and moral nature –
EU demands solution of the problem in the future. We hope these
problems will be included on the agenda, however it will take 10-15
years. Until Turkey becomes a EU member, we cannot hope for a rapid
opening of the border with Turkey.

– Armenians, living in Turkey, do not agree with the Diaspora on the
accusations of Genocide. What side does Armenia take in this dispute?

– Naturally, Diaspora Armenians are lobbying for this issue more
actively. They are the children of Genocide victims. Their fathers
were deported to Syrian deserts, Arab countries; further on they
migrated to Europe and USA. They grew up on the Genocide stories told
by adults. However, it is not their problem in particular, but
Armenia’s in general. No difference here.

The Historians Have Nothing to Quarrel About

– Wouldn’t it be easier to find the solutions if the historians
discuss the issue first? Is it essential to include the issue on the
agenda?

– Nothing new can be mentioned on this problem. There were a number
of various works, and the events of 1915 are clearly illustrated. If
the scientists sit at a negotiation table, nobody’s opinion will be
altered. The scientists have already finished their share of work. The
Turkish government should get involved at the moment. Why are you
anxious over discussion of this issue? Such problems exist among
various countries: Japan – South Korea, South Korea – China, Japan –
USA, USA – Mexico and others. These countries discuss their historical
problems, preserving their relations – and very stable relations
indeed.

—
Yerevan Press Club of Armenia presents `MediaDialogue Web Site as a
Regional Information Hub’ project. As a part of the project
web site is maintained, featuring the most
interesting publications from the press of Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest updates on
the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.

Armenian speaker congratulates victory anniversary of Iran Islamic revolution

IRNA web site, Tehran
31 Jan 05

MOSCOW

President of the Armenian National Assembly Artur Bagdasaryan, in a
message on Monday [31 January], congratulated the 26th victory
anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

In his message, the Armenian speaker referred to the long-standing
friendly relations between the two countries, reiterating that the
amicable ties between the two nations have been bolstered in the
recent years.

The visit to Armenia of the Iranian President, Mohammad Khatami, and
his accompanied delegation in 2004 resulted in further expansion of
all-out ties between the two countries, he added.

In his message, Bagdasaryan also called for success of the Iranian
nation in all fields.

SPEAKER OF ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT TREASURE OF YOUTH WING OF ORINATS
YERKIR PARTY: OY MEMBERS

YEREVAN, JANUARY 29. ARMINFO. The youth wing of Orinats Yerkir party
must be proud of the fact that it has such a treasure as Armenian
Parliament Speaker, Arthur Baghdasaryan, Head of the parliamentary
faction of the party Samvel Balasanyan addressed the participants of
the Congress of OY Youth Wing, Saturday.

In his words, the youth wing can rely on Arthur Baghdasaryan in all
the issues of party construction. In his turn, Arthur Baghdasaryan
stated that the youth wing must play an active role in overcoming the
possible challenges to be made to Armenia. <The future of our country
must be created by the youth> he said.

WE ARE NOT DIZZY OF OUR ACHIEVEMENTS

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
28 Jan 05

On January 26 the press conference of NKR minister of defence Seyran
Ohanian took place. Seyran Ohanian regularly meets with journalists
because, as he said, he feels obliged to inform people through the
mass media what happensin the Defence Army. As a rule, at the end of
every year the results of work is summed up at all the military units,
and before answering the questions of journalists the minister of
defence briefly presented the results of work in NKR armed forces in
2004 and the plans for 2005. According to Seyran Ohanian, in 2004 also
the effectiveness of the army was improved. The problem of great
importance in present relationships with the enemy – sentry duty- was
in the center of attention. The minister of defence emphasized that
the previous year for the Defence Army was a year of improvement of
effectiveness and fortification. The minister gave a low assessment
for the effectiveness of the army as there were drawbacks. It was
mentioned that in 2005 more determined and effective actions would be
taken. Recognizing the importance of fortifying the front line the
engineering works which started after the cease-fire and gather
momentum year by year were continued in 2004 for improving security
and living conditions. Today the command of the army reports with
pride that owing to the skillful organizational work of commanders of
all the levels and the conscientious service of the military personnel
they managed to fulfil all the tasks set before them. At the same time
the minister of defence thinks that achievements in engineering works
will have a continuous development in 2005. According to Seyran
Ohanian, the life in the army in 2005 will be the logical continuation
of the year 2004. Teaching will be in the center of attention of the
command.` Through intensive training, overcoming of difficulties,
determined work andgood knowledge in the field of military actions we
will achieve significant success,’ said the minister. `The military
exercises in August showed that the level of mobilization readiness of
the command and the military units is 99 per cent. This means that
the men who formerly fought and the personnel who started service in
the postwar years are well-aware that continuous accomplishment of the
army is a vital necessity,’ said Seyran Ohanian. He added that the
army-people relationship strengthening year be year shows that the
army andpeople are unified and thereby invincible. As to education and
discipline, the minister mentioned that in the past three years there
is progress in this sphere too. The cases of emergency in 2004 had
decreased since the previous year. The drawbacks in this sphere are
the consequences of the actuality that being`a family of men’ army
involves young men with various characters whose ardour, feeling of
self-assertion create obstructions in getting adjusted to army
realities. As a result there are emergency cases which worry the
command. Among the achievements the significant improvement of the
social conditions of servicemen was mentioned. Since January 1 the
salaries of officers, corporals and serviceman on contractual basis
were increased. The volume of building increased by about 300 million
drams. A separate sum of 750 million drams will be provided for
improvement of housing conditions of officers. Like the previous year
this year too 300 million drams will be provided for improvement of
housing conditions of the families of killed and disabled
soldiers. `The social problems of commanders are among the priorities
of the army. The army officers must be sure that the rear is safe in
order to work freely in the military units leading ahead our army,’
said the minister of defence of NKR. For the Defence Army the year
2005 was announced year of `Improvement of effectiveness and
strengthening of discipline’. And the motto of the year `Intensive
training,military skills and stable progress’ show that education in
the army is in the first place. ` The army command is glad but not
dizzy of the achievements. We seek to discover the faults, eliminate
them and take measures to prevent them. The fewer faults there are,
the more effective the army will be. There is progress every year and
not only the command says this but also regular checking shows,â=80=9D
said NKR minister of defence Seyran Ohanian.

LAURA GRIGORIAN.
28-01-2005

KLAS-TV, NV
Jan 26 2005

Teens Facing Deportation Talk With Eyewitness News

(Jan. 25) — They’ve spent twelve nights away from home in federal
custody fearing they’ll soon be taken out of the country. The Las
Vegas teens face deportation to Armenia.

Tuesday, while sitting in a holding cell in Los Angeles, the girls
placed a phone call to Eyewitness News Reporter Atle Erlingsson. He
spoke to the girls for about ten minutes.

The girls are scared. They don’t know what’s going on, or if they
will ever see their family again. They were raised here in America.
They are not citizens and the government wants them out. But their
dad and other sisters would stay here.

“It’s terrible. I hate it. I want to go home. I just want to go home.
I can’t take this anymore,” said 18-year-old Emma Sarkisian, drawn to
tears as she talks on the phone.

She and her 17-year-old sister, Mariam spend 13 hours a day sitting
in a federal holding cell. At night, Emma says they’re taken to a
hotel where a male guard watches over their every move — even when
they’re sleeping.

Elena Shulikova has known the girls for years. She’s a family friend
working to stop the deportation. “They’re treated like prisoners or
criminals. And they’re not. And I can only imagine what they’re going
through in there,” Shulikova said.

The two girls eat very little. Emma says, “We eat disgusting food —
jelly sandwiches. The food is terrible. You just have to starve
yourself.”

Shulikova says the prisoner lifestyle is difficult for Emma and
Mariam, two girls who have the same likes and dislikes as your
average teen. “Like a little of make-up. Music. Emma wanted to be a
singer. She had this silly dream of becoming a singer/actress. They
listen to Britney Spears. They love movies. They’re just average high
school kids.”

They’re two average girls who are admittedly scared of their future.
“Yes, of course,” says Mariam. “I know nothing about (Armenia). I
wouldn’t even survive there.”

And that, of course, is the concern of those who know the girls.

Wednesday, a federal judge is expected to reconsider whether or not
the girls should be released on bail until their deportation is
decided.

In the meantime, local politicians are starting to stir up the pot.
Congresswoman Shelley Berkley and Senator Harry Reid are following
the case. They do have the ability to stop a deportation and keep the
girls here.

Yerevan: We Recognize the Kars Agreement
By Cumali Onal, Suleyman Kurt

Published: Tuesday 25, 2005
zaman.com

In an interview with Zaman, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanyan
has recognized the Kars Agreement, stipulated by Ankara.

The Armenian Minister said that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan’s remarks about the Kars Agreement determining the borders
between the two countries were surprising for them. Saying that no
Armenian leaders had made any statements denying Yerevan’s recognition
of the Kars Agreement so far, Oskanyan added: “Armenia is a country
which is a continuation of the Soviet Union. All agreements signed
between the Soviet Union and third countries are valid.”

A high level Turkish diplomat interpreted Oskanyan’s remarks as
“opportunism”. The diplomat said: “There are some expressions in the
Armenian Constitution and the Declaration of Independence which use
the expression “Western Armenia” for Turkey’s eastern regions and Agri
Mountain is also registered in the state emblem. Secondly, they have
made no concrete steps to withdraw from the Azerbaijani territories
that they occupied and the Armenian diaspora continues to accuse
Turkey of genocide. If we are talking about compromise, concrete steps
should be taken on those three areas.” Prime Minister Erdogan raised
the subject of the Kars Agreement after his Moscow trip on January 12,
saying that Yerevan should take the first step on the issue of
Turkey’s opening the Armenian border.

Oskanyan answered questions from Zaman on various issues ranging from
the Kars Agreement to so-called genocide claims.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan explaining that Armenia
does not recognize the Kars Treaty, said “If they say ‘I don’t
recognize it,’ then, in that case, don’t get upset, we won’t recognize
it, either.” Those are the expressions he used. Why don’t you
recognize the Treaty of Kars?

The PM’s statement about the Kars Treaty really surprised me.
Government of Armenia has made no statements saying we don’t recognize
it. We are the successor states of the Soviet Union. All of the
agreements, which the Soviet Union signed, continue to be in force
unless new agreements have been signed to replace them, or unless
statements have been made about not recognizing those agreements.

What is your view on Turkish condition for Armenia to end occupation
in Azerbaijani land?

Turkey can’t try to simplify the Nagorno Karabakh issue so much that
it reduces it to a territorial problem, independent of all other
issues. This is a comprehensive issue, and includes many elements such
as territories, refugees, security, and stability. Until the Nagorno
Karabakh issue arose between Azerbaijan and Armenians, there was no
Azerbaijani territory under Armeniancontrol. Those territories came
under Armenian control after the Nagorno Karabakh issue came to the
fore. The Turkish side is confusing cause and consequence. By
separating cause from consequence, you can’t solve this problem. At
the heart of the problem, is that Azerbaijan doesn’t deal with the
fundamental core issue. That is why Turkey can’t turn the territories
issue into a precondition. It’s not that we’re not for finding a
solution. But we want the issue to be looked at in its totality.

What do you say about Turkey’s mediation? By the same token, should
Russia have become a mediator?

Turkey cannot be a mediator in the Nagorno Karabakh resolution
process, because it is biased. Russia, on the other hand, has no
preconditions for a resolution. And it is not biased. But Turkey comes
forward, at every opportunity, from its one-sided position. If Turkey
reviews its policy toward Armenia, establishes full diplomatic
relations, and develops good relations equal tothose it has with
Azerbaijan, then, Turkey’s mediation would be very effective. Turkey
always proposes mediation. Although we have regular bilateral
meetings, without any problems, however, the matter of mediation is
different.

Russia and Turkey’s joint act on the issue does not help for solution

How does a joint cooperation between Ankara and Russia affect the
solution?

We have no problems with the fact that we are on the agenda of both
countries. However, I don’t believe that the combined efforts of the
two countries would aid in the resolution process.

One fifth of Azerbaijani land is under Armenian occupation. When will
you end this?

Nagorno Karabakh has always been Armenian territory. As for the other
regions, that is a matter between Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan. In
the Soviet Union, Nagorno Karabakh was included within Azerbaijan.
When war erupted between Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan, it is
natural that Armenia helped Nagorno Karabakh. The fundamental reason
that there are negotiations being conducted between Armenia and
Azerbaijan is that Azerbaijan refuses to negotiate with Nagorno
Karabakh.

Years ago, you put Genocide assertions on the agenda. In that regard,
you are also trying to receive the assistance of the West, led by the
US. What is your intent? Are you trying to grab territory from Turkey,
or to receive compensation?

Take a look at the map please. Turkey’s geography, economy, and
population are obvious. Armenia on the other hand is a small and poor
country. On the Armenian foreign policy agenda, there is no reference
to territories or compensation. Our foreign policy goal is
international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, together with
recognition by Turkey. What happened in 1915 is quite obviously
Genocide. Turks have differing opinions about that. Let’s let people
openly discuss this issue. We are democratic societies. There is no
need to become concerned that Armenia is trying to place this issue on
other countries’ agendas. Turks, too, can lobby in different
countries, work with them. However, Armenia absolutely does not view
this as a precondition for the improvementof relations with Turkey. We
have never said that Turkey first acknowledges the Genocide. We could
have resolved the matter through dialogue, had there been diplomatic
relations between the two countries. How are we to resolve this issue?
Since we’re not able to resolve it at the governmental level, then
there are efforts to seek solutions at other levels, through other
channels.

According to you, will Turkey’s entry into the EU facilitate this
claim?

Today, there are two important problems between Armenia and Turkey:
opening the border, and Genocide. For the improvement of relations,
Genocide recognition is not a precondition but open borders
automatically are. No one can insist that there can be normal
relations between two countries if the border between them is
closed. However, even without Genocide recognition, it is possible to
normalize relations. The Genocide is a moral, broader issue. The EU,
too, would like for Turkey to recognize the Genocide at some stage in
the process. We hope that these matters will be included in the agenda
for negotiations between Turkey and the EU to begin later this year.
But on the border issue, we can’t wait 10-15 years or longer, for
Turkey to be accepted into the EU, for there to be some positive
movement. We hope that very soon, Turkey will open the border.

Armenians living in Turkey accuse the Armenians of the Diaspora for
insisting on Genocide recognition. Where does Armenia take place in
this discussion?

It is natural that the Armenians of the Diaspora would more frequently
raise the issue. They are the descendants of the Genocide survivors.
Their grandfathers were pushed to the Syrian deserts, to the Arab
countries, and from there, they moved on to Europe and the US. They
grew up listening to the elders telling stories of the Genocide. But,
this isn’t just their issue; it’s also Armenia’s issue. There is no
difference between them.

There is nothing left for historians to discuss about

If the issue is first discussed by historians and specialists, and
they find some common ground, wouldn’t that ease the process?

There is nothing new to say on this. There are countless studies on
the subject and the events of 1915 have very clearly emerged. If the
historians were to gather again, no one’s point of view would change.
The specialists have been working. They’re done with their work. Now,
it is essential that the Turkish government enter into this discussion.
Why are we afraid of these discussions? Today, around the world,
there are many countries with similar problems. Japan and South Korea,
South Korea and China, Japan and the US, the US and Mexico, and
others. These countries continue to have relations with each other,
even as they continue to discuss these events. And they have fine
relations.

Cairo, Ankara

Turks ask Azeri government to release cargo detained on Georgian border

ANS TV, Baku
22 Jan 05

[Presenter] The Turkish government has appealed to Azerbaijan’s
Foreign Ministry and other government bodies in connection with
Azerbaijan’s refusal to allow wagons of two Turkish companies to enter
Georgia.

[Correspondent] Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other
government bodies have not yet responded to an appeal by the Turkish
embassy about Azerbaijan holding more than 200 wagons of the Baslam
Ltd and Son petrol companies [as heard] on the Azerbaijani-Georgian
border for over two months, the Turkish ambassador to Azerbaijan,
Turan Morali, has told ANS.

Mr Morali said the embassy appealed to Azerbaijan’s appropriate bodies
after the Baslam company asked them for help.

[Morali speaking in Turkish] Around 40,000 tonnes of fuel were
detained two months ago. Of course, the volume [of cargo] and the
losses are very big. They [the companies] want the issue to be settled
as soon as possible. Although I contacted [Azerbaijani officials], I
have not received a direct response yet.

[Correspondent] Sidki Ayan [as heard], head of the Baslam and Son Ltd
companies, also told ANS that customs officials have been holding 253
wagons on the border since 3 November on the pretext of an
inspection. Official Baku says that the inspections on the
Azerbaijani-Georgian border aim to stop cargo from being transported
from Central Asia to Armenia via Azerbaijan and Georgia. Turan Morali
wants the inspections to be completed soon.

[Morali] I mean [changing tack], at least the results of the
inspections should be released and if these companies have done
anything wrong, this should be officially stated. Then they [the
companies] will decide what to do next. But now they do not know what
to do.

[Correspondent] Foreign Ministry spokesman Matin Mirza refused to
comment on the issue.

RIA Novosti, Russia
Jan 20 2005

EXPERT OPINION: RUSSIA AND US NOT TO COMPETE IN CIS

MOSCOW, January 20 (RIA Novosti) – Russia and the United States
should not be rivals in the the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CIS), but work out some rules of the game for the region instead.
This is said in a joint report drafted by the two countries’
political analysts and unveiled on Thursday by Politika Fund
President Vyacheslav Nikonov and Carnegie Moscow Center Director
Andrew Kuchins.

“As the developments in Ukraine have shown, the former Soviet Union
is an especially complicated issue on the Russian-US relations
agenda,” the report states.

Political analysts believe that, since Russian leaders are determined
to dominate the post-Soviet environment while the United States
intends to be proactive in the region too, the drafting of a set of
rules of the game for both to adhere to is the best option Moscow and
Washington can opt for.

The experts noted that a “strategic compromise” on the issue of
Ukraine is unrealistic. The future of Ukraine is going to be shaped
“by the Ukrainians themselves, and any agreement on carving up
spheres of influence is unacceptable and unrealistic,” the report
stresses.

The authors also noted the differences between Moscow and Washington
on the “frozen conflicts” in Abkhazia, South Ossetia (both are
self-proclaimed states in the territory of Georgia), Transdniestria
(the unrecognized state in the territory of Moldova) and Nagorny
Karabakh (an Armenian-populated region of Azerbaijan).

“Russia and the United States reiterated their commitment to a
peaceful settlement of all difficulties, support of the territorial
integrity of Georgia and Moldova and reaching agreement with the
above nations on Russian military presence,” the report reads.

The U.S., the political analysts emphasized, should proceed from the
premise that no long-term agreement on Georgia and Moldova is
feasible without Russia’s full-scale involvement in crafting it.

The report mentions that in spite of the current differences, Russia
and the United States are equally interested in preventing terrorist
forces from operating in the CIS, with opportunities for Russian-US
cooperation in the field available.

At the same time, the authors underlined that the Chechnya problem
should not be approached in the same manner as are other CIS
conflicts.

“Russian-US. cooperation in resolving the Chechnya problem is
unrealistic. Russia alone can resolve the problems of the North
Caucasus while other states may be invited to participate in
reconstruction in the region when it becomes safe,” the report reads.