Author: Harutyunian Christine

PRESS RELEASE
THE GREENS UNION OF ARMENIA
Dr. Hakob Sanasaryan, President
47-13, Mamikonyants st., 375051, Yerevan,
Republic of Armenia, Tel: (374-1) 281 411
Tel/fax: 257 634; E-mail: [email protected]

An Appeal to the Government of Armenia
October, 2006

The Greens Union of Armenia is appealing to the government of Armenia
not to interfere with the natural rise of the water level of Lake
Sevan.

We do not know when we will have another opportunity like this one:
due to meteorological and hydrologic conditions the water level has
risen by 2 meters during the last 5 years.

Since 1982, all the scientific studies have come to the same
conclusion that in order to preserve the water quality of the lake,
its fauna and its flora, the water level must rise by a minimum of 6
meters, thus reaching to the level of 1903.5 meters above sea level
(abs). Note that 1903.5 meters abs is still about 13 meters below the
lake’s original level of 1915.89 meters abs in the year 1930. At the
level of 1903.5 meters abs, additional studies must be carried out to
decide whether the lake needs a further rise in its water level in
order to recover its health and biodiversity . Therefore, all
construction is legally forbidden below the level of 1908.5 meters abs
in the watershed of Lake Sevan. (Although much has been constructed
below that level.) Similarly, the Law on Lake Sevan obligates the
government to take measures to insure that the lake’s level will rise
by 6 meters over a certain period of time.

Nevertheless, it has come to the attention of the Greens Union that
recently the government is taking steps in the direction of
interfering with the rise of the water level of Lake Sevan. For
example, the minutes of August 28, 2006 meeting with the President of
Armenia (HNA-16), indicate a clear attempt to change the existing law
regarding the rise of the lake’s water level, as well as a proposal to
lower the storm margin (wave height) from 5 meters down to 1 – 1.5
meters. According to the log of that meeting, all the changes are
proposed in order to preserve the existing structures and forests on
the shores of the lake, and also for the construction of a small port.
In addition, the log indicates that various ministries are directed to
perform their respective tasks in order to accomplish the changes in
the existing laws regarding Lake Sevan. Thus, the motives of the
government’s policy or rather, the causes of the government’s
mismanagement of the lake and its watershed basin have become clear.
For example, it is clear now why the Vorotan tunnel, which was
constructed during the hardest economic period for Armenia and which
was meant to replenish the water supply of the lake by routing water
from the River Vorotan, has not been put into operation at all, it’s
clear why there is no attempt to rehabilitate the very expensive
Arpa-Sevan tunnel (piercing 48 kilometers through a mountainous
terrain to supply water to the lake), and why there is no attempt to
clear the shores of the lake from trees, bushes and structures before
the rising water inundates them all. At the same time, certain
individuals are allowed to construct luxury homes and hotels right on
the beach, even destroying natural habitats, such as marsh areas where
the birds nest. All construction activities are forbidden by law
inside the Sevan National Park, which is a preserve, where all
disturbance of the wilderness is forbidden.

Another indication of the government’s true concerns became evident
during a conference/discussion at the National Academy of Sciences on
July 29th, 2005; the chairman and the main speaker of the conference
was the Minister of Nature Protection, Mr. Vartan Ayvazyan, and
persons expressing opposing views were not allowed to express their
views. During the speeches and discussions it was proposed that
something ought to be done to control the rise of the water level, and
studies need to be done in order to recommend a way or ways of slowing
the rise of the water level. Thus, Minister Ayvazyan declared: `The
rise of the level of the lake is happening faster than expected.
While it was anticipated to have the plan [the 6 meter rise]
implemented during a period of 30 years, given the current rate of
rise, the process will be over in 15 years. Therefore, just like the
drop of the lake was unmanageable, we do not wish that the rise be the
same way.’ (published in `Armenian World’, July 30, 2005).

Apparently, the government was planning for the water level to rise by
6 meters very slowly, during a period of some 30 years! (Note that
there is no scientific basis for the chosen number of 30 years.)
However, now, the water level of Lake Sevan is rising too fast for the
government; nature seems to be asserting itself, once again reminding
us of its might… We should humbly accept this gift of nature
replenishing our main reservoir of fresh water, since we are incapable
of predicting how nature will behave in the near future, where we may
discover that the water level once again is dropping…

(end)

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 21 2006

Canada Backs Joint Committee for Armenian Claims
By Cihan News Agency
Saturday, October 21, 2006
zaman.com

Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay said that his country
supported a Turkish proposal of setting up a joint committee of
historians to study genocide allegations, Turkish Foreign Minister
Spokesman Namik Tan said in a written statement.

Tan stated that Canadian Foreign Minister MacKay attended a reception
at the Turkish embassy in Ottawa Wednesday, on the occasion of the
establishment of Turkish-Canadian Friendship Group established in the
Canadian parliament.

Delivering a speech at the reception, MacKay noted that he supported
the Turkish proposal. MacKay also related that he urged his Armenian
counterpart, Vartan Oskanian, to support the Turkish proposal, Tan
added.

Tan also stated that Mackay appreciated Turkey for its efforts to
evacuate Canadian citizens during the conflict between Israeli and
Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon in July. MacKay also conveyed
that his country welcomed Turkey’s cooperation with Canada in
Afghanistan.

amp;alt=&trh=20061021&hn=37564

France votes on ‘Armenian genocide’

Al-Ahram Weekly, Egypt
Oct 19-25 2006

Last week’s vote aiming to make it an offence in France to question
the Armenian genocide has met with some formidable opposition,
reports David Tresilian in Paris

French MPs last week passed a bill aiming to make it an offence in
France "to question the Armenian genocide", being the massacres carried
out against the Armenian population of Anatolia in the dying days of
the Ottoman Empire during the First World War in which hundreds of
thousands of Armenians are believed to have died.

The bill, introduced into the lower house of the French parliament by
the socialists with the support of members of France’s ruling centre-
right parties but not of the government itself, was passed by 106
votes for and 19 against, with only 125 of the parliament’s 577 MPs
turning out to vote.

The bill, which will not become law until it is passed by the
parliament’s upper house and signed by the president, would make it a
criminal offence in France to question the "existence of the Armenian
genocide", those doing so risking up to five years in prison and a
45,000 Euro fine.

France has already legislated on other historical issues, the so-called
"Gayssot law" of July 1990 making it an offence in France to deny the
extermination carried out by the Hitler regime against Europe’s Jews,
and another law of January 2001 "publicly recognising the Armenian
genocide" but not making it an offence in France to deny it.

Response to the vote was immediate both in France and in Turkey, with
French commentators expressing reservations at the apparent use of
legislation to decide historical questions and thereby threatening
important freedoms, and the Turkish government protesting against
what it said was French interference in Turkey’s domestic affairs.

According to an editorial in the left-of-centre newspaper Liberation,
the proposed law was "ill- considered" since it would prevent freedom
of historical research, and the vote was an "abuse of intellectual
authority" on the part of the French parliament. According to an
editorial in the establishment newspaper Le Monde, "history is an
affair for historians" not for the French state, and politicians should
not try to set up a "ministry of truth" to decide historical questions.

The Liberty for History group, which brings together famous names
from the French historical profession including Marc Ferro, Jacques
Julliard, Pierre Nora and Mona Ozouf, also declared its opposition
to the proposed law. While expressing its "profound sentiment of
solidarity" for the "victims of history", the group deplored the
movement in France to "establish an official version of the past",
which "threatened freedom of thought and expression."

However, comment in the French press has focused at least as much on
the electoral advantages of the proposed law and its meaning in the
context of French politics as it has on the question of historical
truth.

France has a sizeable Armenian minority, and with only months to go
before the French presidential elections in April 2007, candidates
from both the socialist and centre-right parties have been looking
for support, with the centre-right frontrunner, Nicolas Sarkozy, and
the socialist favourite, Segolène Royale, both reportedly in favour
of the proposed law.

The vote is also being seen as part of a campaign in France to
frustrate Turkish accession to the European Union, not only by
insisting that the Armenian massacres constitute genocide, but also
by making recognition of Armenian genocide a precondition for Turkish
membership of the EU, the Turkish Republic being the successor state
to the Ottoman Empire.

Opinion polls in France have consistently indicated that a majority
of French citizens oppose Turkish membership of the EU, and since it
is believed that the Turkish government will not be able to agree to
recognition of the Armenian genocide, insisting on such a condition
would help to scupper Turkish membership.

For foreign observers, the French vote has come as an example of the
country’s susceptibility to grandstanding legislation on issues that
are usually considered to be matters for historical research, deciding
by legal means questions that elsewhere are seen as matters for debate.

Under the 1948 UN Convention that defines the crime of genocide in
international law, the term refers to "acts committed with intent
to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such", and it is not clear that there was such
an intention on the part of those carrying out the Armenian massacres.

According to a spokesman for the European Commission in Brussels,
should the proposed French legislation come into effect, it would
"prevent the dialogue and debate necessary for reconciliation" and
would have a "disastrous effect" on freedom of expression in Turkey,
where "it would only oppose one official version of the truth to
another."

For its part, the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul commented that
"the French, who have already placed various obstacles in the way of
Turkey’s joining the European Union, have now struck a serious blow to
the already limited dialogue between Turkey and Armenia… one that
will only play into the hands of extreme nationalists and racists in
both Turkish and Armenian societies."

–Boundary_(ID_hx1iz6AZAzAaTqjhr jgbjA)–

ARMENIAN ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY DOCTORS PROPOSES TO ENSURE BY
LEGISLATION INSTITUTION OF FAMILY DOCTOR IN ARMENIA

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Oct 19 2006

YEREVAN, October 19. /ARKA/. On Thursday at the second clinical
conference on Modern Issues of Family Medicine Chairman of the Armenian
Association of Family Doctors Samvel Hovhannisyan told journalists
that the Armenian Association of Family Doctors proposed to ensure
by legislation the institution of family doctors in the country.

"We propose either to include a special chapter about the family
doctors in the Law On Healthcare, being discussed today, or adopt a
separate Law On Family Medicine, particularly for regulation of such
issues as organization and financing of the system of family medicine",
Hovhannisyan said.

Speaking of nowadays issues of the family medicine development in
Armenia, Hovhannisyan emphasized that there existed problems of
introduction of that institution in cities.

He said that in villages those functions had always been performed
by district doctors.

"However there is a great outpatient system with great staff of narrow
specialists and district doctors in cities, and those functions should
be divided", Hovhannisyan said.

He pointed out that at present the population of the republic was
passive in the selection of a family doctor, nevertheless expressing
belief that in January 2007, people would turn to services of family
medicine more actively.

He informed journalists that this year the government had adopted
an order, determining mechanisms of free selection of doctors by the
population. S.P.–0–

POLL: MAJORITY OF FRENCH OPPOSE ARMENIAN BILL

The New Anatolian
Oct 17 2006

The majority of French people are against the Armenian bill that was
passed by the French Parliament last week introducing prison terms
and fines for those who question the genocide claims, a new public
opinion poll found.

According to an Internet poll, 68 percent of French people oppose the
bill while only 26 percent support it. Just 6 percent of participants
in the poll declined to comment on the controversial measure.

While those opposing the bill thinks it serves Armenian interests,
some stated that it could create danger for Armenians living in Turkey.

SAUVER LA RELATION FRANCO-TURQUE DU PSYCHODRAME
Par Bertrand Viala, directeur de Serenus conseil Turquie

La Tribune , France
18 octobre 2006

Peut-on encore sauver la relation franco-turque du psychodrame
permanent? Le vote de la proposition de loi criminalisant la negation
du "genocide" armenien ne va pas y contribuer, bien au contraire. Il
ne s’agit pas ici de polemiquer sur la nature exacte des evènements
qui ont accompagne de facon confuse et sanglante la fin de l’Empire
ottoman. Cependant, il faut etre clair sur un point: tout aussi
importante qu’elle soit, la question armenienne ne peut pas et ne
doit pas etre le denominateur commun entre la France et la Turquie.

"Pourquoi les Francais n’aiment pas la Turquie?" Voila la question
a laquelle sont confrontes les Francais vivant sur place. On ne
sait que repondre car la France n’a pas de raison objective de ne
pas aimer la Turquie: les echanges economiques entre les deux pays
sont florissants, les grandes entreprises francaises comme Renault,
Carrefour ou Axa sont bien installees dans le paysage turc, la culture
francaise reste encore diffusee.

Paradoxalement, la France semble cristalliser toutes les exasperations,
certainement parce que le sentiment general est que la France ne
tient pas compte de ce que pense la Turquie et refuse de la considerer
comme un partenaire a part entière. La Turquie voit en la France une
amie qui ne lui rend pas la pareille. Les griefs sont très varies:
ils melent le soupcon que la France se mefie de la Turquie en raison
de sa confession majoritairement musulmane, que la France voit la
Turquie comme un pays arriere et un pays de barbares, que la France
apporterait un soutien certain aux mouvements separatistes kurdes,
encourageant de ce fait la guerilla urbaine dans le sud-est du pays.

Image peu enviable. Le problème principal, qui synthetise au point
de caricaturer, l’image assez peu enviable de la Turquie en France,
reste cependant la reference systematique au genocide armenien,
dont les episodes les plus recents sont marques par l’inauguration
de monuments en memoire des victimes, et le vote d’une loi sur le
negationnisme. Reglons tout de suite son compte a cette loi qui met
le feu aux poudres. Il est difficile de voir en quoi elle permet de
progresser sur l’examen de la question armenienne. L’un des premiers
objectifs a atteindre serait d’encourager la Turquie a ouvrir ses
archives. Comment et pourquoi le ferait-elle, alors qu’un texte comme
celui-ci implique qu’elle soit condamnee unilateralement avant meme
qu’un examen des faits ait ete effectue dans le detail?

Depossedee de son histoire avant meme d’avoir pu se prononcer, quelle
motivation reste-t-il a la Turquie pour traiter cette question?

Comment peuvent donc travailler les historiens si d’une part l’histoire
a ete ecrite sans eux, et s’ils ne peuvent acceder aux archives. Vu de
Turquie, le Parlement francais agit comme si la Turquie et l’Armenie,
les deux acteurs principaux concernes par la question armenienne,
etaient totalement incapables de prendre en charge eux-memes leur
histoire conflictuelle. La France en tentant de jouer le rôle de
justicier ne fait donc ni justice a ceux qu’elle pretend defendre,
ni a elle-meme. Tout d’abord, a condamner l’histoire des autres, on
s’expose a la condamnation de sa propre histoire par les autres. Il est
tout aussi probable, comme les medias turcs l’ont montre abondamment
dans les semaines precedant la date fatidique du 18 mai que la Turquie
demande a la France de reconnaître un genocide en Algerie.

Une boîte de Pandore. En tant que Francais vivant en Turquie, comment
defendre la position francaise qui consiste a accuser la Turquie de
negationnisme sur sa propre histoire, quand notre pays a longtemps
jete un voile sur la guerre d’Algerie a laquelle on se referait en
parlant "d’evenements". La France a donc ouvert une boîte de Pandore
dans laquelle va etre minutieusement fouille et expose tout ce qui
peut affaiblir sa position d’accusateur et de manière plus general
son prestige, sa renommee et sa credibilite.

De fait, une telle initiative ne fait que ruiner les efforts de tous
ceux qui tentent d’etablir la bonne entente necessaire aux interets de
chacun des deux pays. La concentration d’evenements lies a la question
armenienne depuis le debut de 2006 incite legitimement a se poser la
question de savoir s’il n’y a pas eu sabotage de la relation. Ou bien
est-ce seulement dû a l’absence d’analyse sur la facon dont de telles
actions auraient pu etre interpretees en Turquie? Dans les deux cas,
la demarche est une faute politique fort dommageable: la Turquie a
besoin de la France en Europe, et la France ne peut se passer d’un
allie de taille aussi important, au potentiel aussi riche. Il est
triste que tout soit remis en cause par une initiative de quelques
deputes, etablie unilateralement sans concertation avec les acteurs
du dialogue a savoir les diplomates, les hommes d’affaires et les
grandes societes travaillant en Turquie, qui ont eux ont les cles
pour comprendre et faire passer des messages. Il aurait ete utile
qu’avant de poursuivre la condamnation, les protagonistes osent jeter
un oeil objectif sur la Turquie contemporaine, en plein changement,
et connaissant une croissance exceptionnelle, et loin des cliches
orientalistes dans lesquels il est commode de l’enfermer.

N’en deplaise a nos amis Armeniens, comme a tous les frileux qui
insultent l’avenir a defaut de pouvoir le maîtriser, la France ne peut
pas s’offrir le luxe de compromettre ses relations avec la Turquie.

–Boundary_(ID_b8x1MUNJH4VJ49TjgofZNQ)–

TURKEY MAY WAIT DECADES TO JOIN EU

United Press International
Oct 16 2006

BRUSSELS, Oct. 16 (UPI) — Turkey may have to wait for as long as 20
years to join the European Union.

One of the big stumbling blocks is Cyprus, the EU Observer said.

Turkey has refused to lift a blockade against the Cypriot government,
an EU member, while other countries refuse to recognize the Turkish
part of Cyprus.

Jose Manuel Barroso, head of the European Commission, warned that
the admissions process is likely to slow down, The Times of London
reported. Barroso said that Turkey’s move to reform in human rights
has stalled.

Last week, the lower house of the French parliament approved a bill
that would make denying the Armenian genocide a crime. While that
bill is unlikely to become law, it has strained relations between
France and Turkey, where nationals who write about the genocide can
face criminal prosecution.

In an interview with the BBC, Barroso said that Turkish admission
"would be great" if the country met the EU criteria.

"This is not yet the case," he said. "It is a country that comes
from a different tradition. There are efforts in the right direction
but nowadays there is news that is not encouraging in terms of them
coming closer to us."

DECLINE IN ARMENIA’S EXPORT IS A RESULT OF DEVELOPMENTS ON INTERNATIONAL MARKETS, RA MINISTER OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SAYS

Noyan Tapan News Agency, Armenia
Oct 16 2006

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 16, NOYAN TAPAN. According to the RA Minister of
Trade and Economic Development Karen Chshmaritian, a 3.6% deline in
export in January-August 2006 on the same months of last year happened
as a result of the fact that the Armenian economy integrated into
international markets, and the developments taking place in those
markets affect Armenia’s export. The minister stated this during
hearings on the dram’s appreciation in the RA National Assembly on
October 16.

According to him, during the indicated period, the prices of
feromolybdenum, one of export products, declined by 60-65% on
international stock exchanges. Export of alcoholic drinks from Armenia
to Russia decreased by 13% as a result of some imperfect amendments
made to the RF legislation about circulation of such drinks. The
decline in jewelry export is also related to some continuous declines
on the international market.

The minister explained the 20% import growth in January-August 2006
on the same months of 2005 by an increase in equipment and technology
import.

SATISFACTION EN ARMENIE, PRUDENCE EN RUSSIE
par Madeleine Vatel

Le Monde
14 octobre 2006 samedi

" Cette decision est une reaction naturelle a la politique officielle
agressive d’Ankara niant toute responsabilite concernant le genocide
des Armeniens. Lorsqu’il vote sur ce thème, le Parlement francais
est dans son droit ", a commente, jeudi 12 octobre, le ministère des
affaires etrangères armenien, après l’adoption de la loi francaise
penalisant la negation du genocide de 1915.

En Armenie, la decision est percue comme une avancee politique. " Nous
avons le sentiment de sortir d’un certain isolement, de nous rapprocher
de l’Europe ", estime Amaiak Oganessian, depute a l’Assemblee nationale
et directeur de l’Union des politologues.

Lors de la visite de Jacques Chirac a Erevan, le 30 septembre, le
president armenien Robert Kotcharian n’avait toutefois fait aucun
commentaire, lors d’une conference de presse, sur le projet de loi
francais. Il avait meme prononce des paroles plutôt positives quant
a l’idee d’une integration de la Turquie dans l’Europe. " Nous ne
voyons pas d’inconvenient a continuer sur le chemin de cette adhesion
", avait-il dit, soulignant que l’Armenie avait interet a avoir des
" voisins les plus democratiques possibles ", et appelant Ankara a
adherer aux " système de valeurs qui sont celles de l’Europe ".

Le site Internet de la communaute armenienne de Russie, haylife.ru,
s’est rejoui de l’adoption de la loi : " Grâce aux parlementaires
francais, il sera possible d’arreter la machine de propagande du
gouvernement turc ".

En Russie, alliee regionale de l’Armenie, mais qui a recemment durci sa
politique energetique en doublant le prix du gaz qu’elle lui fournit,
la reaction etait prudente. Le chef du comite constitutionnel du Senat,
Iouri Charandine, a estime, que l’adoption de la loi s’expliquait
par le desir de la France de " retablir la justice historique "
mais qu’" au lieu d’etre calmee, la situation – avec la Turquie –
va devenir encore plus tendue ".

–Boundary_(ID_6S9ALKpX2VadEryq3PIxdA)–

FRANCE CONDEMNS NEGATION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Yerkir/am
October 13, 2006

The French Parliament voted on Thursday in favor of the bill penalizing
the negation of the Armenian Genocide.

After 3 and half hours of debates to the platform of the National
Assembly, the deputies voted "YES" in majority (127 against 19)
for the law condemning the negation of the Armenian Genocide.

"It is with the heart that UDF group will vote on the bill" said André
Santini, great friend of the Armenian community of France. This law
condemns the contraveners to a maximum sorrow of 45,000 euros fine
and one year of prison.

Adoption of the bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide
was quite expected, Head of the Department of Turkey of the NAS of RA,
Doctor Ruben Safrastian told PanARMENIAN.Net.

In his words, the passage of the bill evidences that the public and
political forces of Europe understand that Turkey may become an EU
member only in case it opens the dark pages of its history. "The
country should find the courage to face the past and accept it
properly," Safrastian said.

In his turn, Head of Hay Dat Office Kiro Manoyan underscored in a
conversation with a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter that the adoption of
the Genocide bill is only the first step. "Ratification in the Senate
is the next, while the President has to sign it after that. I do not
think serious problems may arise in the Senate," Manoyan remarked.

As for the threats by Turkey, the Head of Hay Dat Office underscored
that expected sanctions against France will hit as a boomerang upon
Turkey itself. " I believe that statements of the Turkish party within
the past week are bluff. It is in its own interest to recognize
the Armenian Genocide if it really wants to become an EU member,"
Manoyan said.

–Boundary_(ID_sTJ3P/B2CV0C9vIxj4smsg)–