NALBANDYAN LOST TO MARAT SAFIN
ArmRadio.am
11.01.2007 16:58
In the first round of the tournament held in the city of Koyong not
far from Melbourne Argentinean Armenian tennis player David Nalbandyan
lost to Russian Marat Safin with the score 1:2 (7:5, 1:6, 2:6). David
Nalbandyan arrived in Melbourne with knee injury and it’s not clear so
far whether he will be able to participate in the first "Grand Slam"
tournament – the Australian Open, which will soon start in Melbourne.
PRESS RELEASE
Advocates for Armenia
CONTACT: Tamar Hayrikyan, Officer
P.O.Box 250771
New York, NY 10025
Email: [email protected]
http://www.advocates forarmenia.org/
Tel: 781.913.7617
*College Students Work Towards Greater Role for the Diaspora in **Armenia**’s
Development*
New York, N.Y. –
On February 3rd and 4th, 2007 Armenian students from all over the United
States and Canada will gather at Columbia University in New York City to
discuss the challenges and opportunities for development in Armenia. Organized
by the Columbia University Armenian Club and Advocates for Armenia , the
summit is being sponsored by the Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU)
and the Armenian Center at Columbia University.
The purpose of the summit, titled "Armenia’s Development: The Students’
Role", is to empower young Armenians to effect positive change in Armenia
today. The two-day meeting will feature presentations by prominent figures
in the developing fields of business, information technology, health, law,
and education, as well as addresses by high-ranking Armenian diplomats.
These presentations will set the stage for the core of the summit: Intensive
working sessions that will facilitate student action. During these sessions,
student participants will work with experts to formulate innovative ideas
for specific, small-scale projects to be implemented in Armenia within the
next two years.
Founder and Coordinator of Advocates for Armenia, Levon Bagramian, believes
that activities such as this summit should become frequent in the Armenian
communities of the United States. "We are trying to get people to shift
their attention to things that matter, things that will outlive us," says
Bagramian. "We believe that Armenians of our generation have a lot at stake
in the future of Armenia, a country that has been growing and changing at a
pace unprecedented in its recent history. At the end of this road, we
envision an Armenia that is independent, peaceful, prosperous and
democratic. Until then, we will not be satisfied with sitting back and
watching it happen on its own. We have made the decision to be a part of the
action, and we encourage our colleagues from the Diaspora to do the same."
Registration is open to everyone on a first-come first-serve basis. More
information and access to the registration page are available at
SECOND FERRYBOAT LINE TO LINK ARMENIA WITH RUSSIA
Armenpress
Jan 09 2007
YEREVAN, JANUARY 9, ARMENPRESS: Armenia has been posting double-digit
economic growth rates in the last several years with its foreign trade
growing 20-25 percent annually. Armenpress asked Arsen Ghazarian,
chairman of the Armenian Union of Industrialists and Businessmen,
(he is also director general of Apaven forwarding company), to
share his views on whether the current external transport and road
infrastructures are sufficient to meet the demands of the expanding
business.
A. Being constrained by a partial blockade and being unable to use
some of major roads, for example the railways conduits towards Russia,
Iran, Turkey and Europe, Armenia has managed through these years
to adapt to working in these conditions and its economy has been
expanding by double-digit rates in the last 5 years with forwarding
companies making their contribution to the overall GDP growth. These
companies are trying to improve their services and make them conform
with international standards. But transport infrastructures-sea
ports, railways and terminals may fail in several years to meet the
demands of expanding economy. Nevertheless I believe we will be able
to resist in upcoming years regional competition challenges, posed
also by transport infrastructures.
Q. What routes Armenian businessmen are using now to conduct foreign
trade and are there prospects for new routes that could open any
time soon?
A. Now there are two major roads linking Armenia to the external
world. One of them is through Iran from where Armenian businessmen
can reach the Persian Gulf and further towards East and the second
route lies through Georgian ports of Poti and Batumi on the Black Sea.
Armenian businessmen use seaways to transport their cargo batches
to Russia, particularly, by Poti-Novorosiysk and Poti-Ilichevsk
ferryboats. A program envisaging foundation of a second ferryboat line
with a Russian port, by the way, this program has been elaborated in
the last 10 years, is set to materialize soon and in all likelihood
in March or April we shall have a second ferryboat line between the
port of Poti and the Russian port of Kavkaz.
Vessels with required displacement have been constructed to
operate this new route as the Russian port Kavkaz is in shallow
waters. Operation of this new route will enable Armenian businessmen
to transport their goods to Russia by freight cars and this in turn
will decrease all costs by 20-25 percent and will fill also the gap
that was caused by the closure of Azerbaijani and Abkhazian railways
for Armenia.
This new road will also boost development of facilities in Georgian
sea ports- construction of new terminals and mooring lines. We also
appreciate the decision of the government on handing the Armenian
Railway to a concessional management that will be accomplished in
2008. The company that will win the right to run the Armenian Railways
will have to make serious investments to improve its overall operation
and management.
Reopening of the Abkhazian section of the railway and of another
railway from Turkish Kars to Armenian Gyumri offer alternative
options but they are possible only after the settlement of the
Georgian-Abkhazia conflict and normalization of Armenia-Turkey
relationships. Given this Armenia will regain its once status of a
transit transport juncture.
Q. Several years ago a new $20 million worth terminal was built for
Zvartnots airport to make Armenia a transit country for transportation
of goods by air. Does it serve this goal?
A. The terminal was built on a $20 million credit and in conformity
with European standards. It is supposed to become a transit juncture
for both passenger and cargo aircrafts. A government decision that has
adopted the so-called ‘5th free corridor’ for cargo transportation
will give a fresh boost to these plans. In view of a tough struggle
launched by Lufthansa, British Airways, Austrian Airlines and Russian
carriers for Armenian air market and in view of a new terminal which
is being built for the airport we can say that real opportunities
are opening for invested money to serve their goals.
SERBIAN FOREIGN MINISTER CRITICIZES ARMENIAN ARMS DEAL
Vecernje novosti, Belgrade, Serbia
Dec 6 2007
Interview with Serbian Minister of Foreign Affairs Vuk Draskovic by
Tanja Markotic
"Serbian diplomacy increasingly private!"
The story of arms exports to Armenia continues. As Kragujevac armourers
await a denouement, the domestic political discord between President
Tadic and Prime Minister Kostunica is setting the decisive tone in
the entire matter more than anything else.
Foreign Minister Vuk Draskovic, whose ministry has come under fire for
refusing to issue the permit for that arms export, explains to Vecernje
Novosti that that does fall under his purview. He also criticizes the
steps taken by President Tadic in recent days in connection with the
controversial export deal.
[Draskovic] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not issue permits
for the exportation of arms; rather, that is the job of the Serbian
government. We only provide a political opinion, and that opinion
has not changed from the outset. We have long declared that the OSCE
has imposed an arms embargo on Armenia and Azerbaijan because of
the conflict in Nagornyy-Karabakh and that there is an instructive
Resolution 8153 by the UN Security Council that requires all countries
to refrain from supplying "any arms or ammunition to Armenia or
Azerbaijan." Then there is the decision by the US Government to
discontinue business with countries that violate arms embargoes. Since
the Kragujevac arms manufacturers earn more than 20m dollars a year
from exporting arms to the United States, there is a big risk of
losing 22m dollars because of that 2m dollars deal with Armenia,
but from the outset I have thought that the state should compensate
the arms manufacturers.
[Markotic] What does that mean in concrete terms? That our arms
manufacturers will nevertheless be unable to export arms to Armenia?
[Draskovic] They will if the government decides they can, because
that it entirely under their purview. If that is what the government
decides after this, in my opinion, irresponsible and private diplomacy
by President Tadic, then our state is obliged to report that exporting
of arms to the OSCE and the United Nations and explain to them why
the embargo and the UN instructive resolution were violated.
[Markotic] How it is possible, then, for Russia to give a positive
opinion about the arms export while both the OSCE and the United
Nations oppose it?
[Draskovic] There has never been a Russian embargo on exporting arms to
Armenia and Azerbaijan, and so there was no reason for the president
to send his emissaries to Moscow and ask permission to export arms to
Armenia. He should have read the opinion of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, but he either failed to read that or ignored it. Because of
all that, we are in a very difficult and awkward situation.
[Markotic] So how does the government intend to resolve this situation
now?
[Draskovic] The government, as the prime minister has told me, has
been presented with a fait accompli. This is a typical example of
how not to engage in diplomacy. It should not be done privately or
for partisan-electioneering purposes.
[Markotic] It is already more than obvious that Prime Minister
Kostunica and President Tadic are also at odds over dispatching our
ambassadors who have already been accredited by their host countries.
Have you discussed this with Tadic? Why does he refuse to sign the
letters of credence?
[Draskovic] We have officially asked the office of the president to
sign the orders and letters of credence on several occasions. But we
have either heard a negative response or no response at all. This
is absurd and inexplicable. President Tadic’s explanation that he
is waiting for the election is hardly acceptable in view of the
fact that these are ambassadorial positions that have been vacant
for seven months now. Aside from ambassadors to the United Nations
and the OSCE, Serbia has not sent out a single ambassador since
Montenegro’s departure.
[Markotic] Does the appointment of ambassadors impact Serbia’s position
at a time when negotiations on Kosovo are going on? Opinions about
that vary.
[Draskovic] Of course a vacant ambassadorship is very harmful to
Serbia’s interests. We do not have ambassadors in some countries that
are members of the Contact Group, which is in charge of deciding
the future status of Kosovo – Russia, Great Britain, and Italy. To
say nothing of other countries that are also very important to a
resolution of the Kosovo issue, such as Spain, Belgium, or Finland,
where, say, the ambassador was proposed in June, when Finland began
its EU presidency. Now that has ended, and we still have no ambassador
in Helsinki. Well, that is irresponsible foreign policy.
[Markotic] Could it soon be the case that Serbia has no ambassador
in Washington either, since Ivan Vujacic’s mandate has expired?
[Draskovic] No. Ambassador Vujacic will remain there until a
replacement is chosen. [Passage omitted]
PRESS RELEASE
ARPA Institute
18106 Miranda St. Tarzana, CA 91356
Contact: Hagop Panossian
Tel: (818) 586-9660
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:
ARPA Institute presents the Lecture/Seminar: "Genocide
Recognition, Turkey-Armenia Relations and the Role of
the Diaspora," by Mr. Harout Sassounian, on Thursday,
January 25, 2007 at the Merdinian School auditorium.
The Address is 13330 Riverside Dr., Sherman Oaks, CA
91403. Directions: on the 101 FWY exit on Woodman, go
north and turn right on Riverside Dr.
Abstract: Mr. Sassounian’s lecture will cover several
topics, followed by an exchange of views with the
audience:
— Genocide recognition, is it really necessary?
— Should Armenians support or oppose the application
of Turkey for EU Membership?
— Turkey-Armenia relations
— Diaspora-Armenia relations
— How best to organize the Diaspora?
— The firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia John Evans
— The hold on the nomination of Ambassador-designate
Richard Hoagland
— UAF’s assistance to Armenia and Lebanon
— Lincy Foundation’s infrastructure projects in
Armenia and Artsakh
Harut Sassounian, the publisher of The California
Courier newspaper, is the President of the United
Armenian Fund which has shipped $460 million worth of
humanitarian assistance to Armenia since 1989. He is
also the Vice Chairman of The Lincy Foundation which
has funded $230 million worth of infrastructure
projects in Armenia and Artsakh. He worked for Procter
and Gamble in Geneva, Switzerland, as an international
marketing executive from 1978 to 1982. He served for
10 years as a non-governmental delegate on human
rights at the United Nations in Geneva, playing a key
role in the UN recognition of the Armenian Genocide in
1985. He has a Master’s degree in International
Affairs from Columbia University (NY) and an MBA from
Pepperdine University. His book, `The Armenian
Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005, Documents
and Declarations,’ published in 2005, was republished
in Arabic translation in Lebanon in 2006. He has been
awarded the `Anania Shiragatsi’ medal of honor by the
President of Armenia and has received numerous other
awards for his leadership and community activities.
For more Information Please call Dr. Hagop Panossian
at (818)586-9660
Why Turks are growing disillusioned with Europe
The Financial Times
By Vincent Boland
Published: January 3 2007 22:52 | Last updated: January 3 2007 22:52
In 1933 Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the father of modern Turkey, threw down a
tantalising challenge to his countrymen on the 10th anniversary of the
founding of the republic: `We shall raise our country to the level of the
most prosperous and civilised countries … we shall raise our national
culture above the level of contemporary civilisation,’ he said.
Atatürk, who died in 1938, bequeathed many exhortations to the Turks. Some
are pithy, some are apocryphal and one or two are even wise. They can be
found today in school textbooks and engraved on the walls of official
buildings. But the reference to `contemporary civilisation’ is more
ambiguous than most. It is generally assumed by Turks that he meant that
Turkey, once the heart of the Ottoman Empire, should become European. He
admired French republicanism and the British parliamentary system and under
his leadership Turkey adopted the weekend, western dress and an army on the
French model, beginning a journey westward that continues more than 80 years
later.
But the ambiguity of the remark, long overlooked, seems prophetic today.
Inside Turkey, the debate about `contemporary civilisation’ is as pertinent
now as it was in Atatürk’s time and this year will be critical in shaping
its outcome. Last year Turkey’s long-held ambition to join the European
Union suffered a head-on clash with reality. The negotiating process is now
partly frozen because of a dispute with Brussels over Cyprus.
Hostility in some EU countries to Turkey’s membership is increasing, while
support for membership among Turks is falling. This year, two events will
have a decisive impact on Turkey’s European ambition. Turkey’s parliament is
due to elect a new president in May in a process that could change the
country’s political dynamic, especially if Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime
minister, seeks the presidency (he has not ruled out such a move). Also,
parliamentary elections slated for November could usher in a coalition
government that lacks the singlemindedness with which Mr Erdogan’s ruling
neo-Islamist Justice and Development party has pursued EU membership.
By the end of 2007, Turkey’s relationship with Europe will not be decided
but it may be clarified. The elections will take place against a background
of a profound change in public consensus on the EU. When Turkey began its
accession process to join the EU in 2004, support for membership stood above
two-thirds. per cent, according to a recent opinion poll in Milliyet,
a Now it is about 35 daily newspaper. The decline is matched by rising
suspicion of the west more generally. The German Marshall Fund of the United
States, in its 2006 Transatlantic Trends survey, showed that Turkey’s
attitude towards the US, on a 100-point scale, declined from 28 in 2004 to
20 in 2006, and towards the EU from 52 to 45.
This about-turn in perceptions is shaking the faith of even the truest
believers in the country’s European destiny. Umit Boyner, a businesswoman
who heads a corporate initiative to promote Turkey in the EU, says: `Most of
us wanted to believe that the EU meant democracy and minority rights and
women’s rights and fighting corruption. Now we see this phobia about Turkey,
this feeling that we are not wanted by other Europeans, and we are asking
ourselves: `Is this really the Europe we believed in, or were we kidding
ourselves?”
The EU’s failure to honour a commitment to end the isolation of Turkish
Cypriots in northern Cyprus is the most obvious cause of this change in
sentiment. The recent vote in the lower house of the French parliament to
make it a crime to deny that the massacre of Armenians in 1915-16 was
genocide created much bitterness. It also led to a backlash against France,
perceived as the most formidable opponent of Turkey’s EU membership.
The EU’s constant focus on minority rights and the role of the armed forces,
mixed with the perception among large numbers of Turks of rising
Islamophobia in Europe, has added to the feeling that the EU is casting
around for an excuse to say a final No to Turkey’s membership. EU officials
insist, however, that the human and political rights of prospective members
are always closely scrutinised and that the door to Turkey remains open.
Cengiz Aktar, a professor and staunch pro-European at Bahcesehir University
in Istanbul, says the tone of the debate in some EU countries suggests that
Turkey is being made to address a question that no other member state has
had to address: whether it is a European country. `Nobody questions the
`Europeanness’ even of Cyprus, which is closer to the Middle East than
Ankara, but Turkey’s Europeanness is under question,’ he says.
Turkey is different from other aspiring EU member states in crucial
respects. Most of the formerly communist countries that have joined the EU
since the end of the cold war saw their destiny in Europe or were seduced by
Europe’s famed `soft power’ – its ability to persuade countries to transform
themselves, with the promise of membership, into stable democracies. This is
not the case with Turkey, a country with an embedded sense of identity based
on a distinctly hard nationalism inherited from Atatürk and the founders of
the republic through an ideology known as Kemalism.
Among its tenets are an unwavering belief in the soundness of Turkey’s
constitutional arrangements – which dictate a delicate balance between the
state and the citizen and parliament and the military – and fidelity to the
founding myths of the republic. These tenets are perceived, in some cases,
to be antithetical to European norms as set out in the Copenhagen Criteria –
a set of political objectives that aspiring EU members must achieve to get
in.
One of the most serious ideological clashes between Turkey and the EU
concerns the role of the military. Since 1923, Turkey’s armed forces have
seen themselves as the guardians of the republic and have staged four coups
d’état since the second world war (the fourth, in 1997, was a `post-modern
coup’ without actual tanks in the streets) as if to prove the point.
Turkey’s armed forces, a popular and monumentally self-important
institution, have agreed to greater civilian control of military affairs,
including budget supervision, as part of the EU process. But whether Turkey
is institutionally ready to accept a complete subordination of the military
to civilian authority, as the EU would require, is one of the central
ambiguities of the country’s European ambition. There are occasional signs
that the ostensibly pro-EU general staff is unconvinced that its vision of a
strong, centralised, sovereign Turkey is consistent with the country’s EU
membership.
If the military is undecided, so is the broad spectrum of public opinion.
For Turkey, joining the EU is a choice rather than a destiny. Because they
view it as a choice and see the decks increasingly stacked against them,
many are starting to rediscover their inner Kemalist. Turks are openly
questioning whether European norms or values are in any way superior to
those they already hold.
Kemalism may merely be a grander name for hard Turkish nationalism, suffused
with a strong sense of republicanism, sovereignty and self-reliance. But
whatever it is called, it is posing a direct challenge to the EU’s soft
power.
Sedat Laciner, director of the International Strategic Research
Organisation, a think-tank in Ankara, says Turkey’s experience of its EU
accession process is of a piece with its experience of other
western-inspired developments in Turkey’s neighbourhood in the past five
years – especially the invasion of Iraq, which remains hugely unpopular
among Turks, and the plight of the Palestinians. `All of these have changed
Turkish attitudes to the EU, with the result that the EU is losing the most
important tool in its arsenal, which is its ability to persuade Turkey to do
as it asks,’ Mr Laciner says.
Suat Kiniklioglu, director of the Ankara office of the German Marshall Fund
of the United States, sees a direct historical parallel between Turkey’s
most recent bout of suspicion of Europe and a similar attitude provoked in
the late 19th century by the agitation of foreign powers for minority rights
in the Ottoman Empire – which in practice would have given European citizens
living there almost colonial-style privileges.
The dynamic of Turkey’s relationship with the EU, where every aspect of its
modern identity and history appears to be a legitimate target for European
scrutiny and criticism, `is almost a replay of a time that invokes Turkey’s
worst fears about disintegration, about our unity being broken, about an
undue emphasis on minorities and people of non-Turkish stock,’ Mr
Kiniklioglu says. By `hitting Turkey on its most sensitive issues,’ he adds,
`the EU has overplayed its hand as far as the impact of its soft power is
concerned.’
The EU accession process has stimulated important reforms in Turkey – such
as changes to the country’s penal code and abolition of the death penalty.
But some commentators say the accession agreement between Turkey and the EU
contains the seeds of its own failure, because it does not offer Turks a
guarantee of membership. It is the first time such a pledge has been
withheld from a candidate country. Ahmet Evin, director of the Istanbul
Policy Centre at Sabanci University, says this fact compromises the EU’s
ability to use moral suasion to encourage Turkey to reform in the way that
would satisfy European public opinion. `The ability of the EU to Europeanise
Turkey is fatally undermined by this lack of commitment,’ he says.
A dialogue of the deaf would therefore appear to be preordained between
Turkey and Europe. A curious side-effect has been the manner in which
Turkish people are now turning on the EU with the message that `without
Turkey, the EU Erdogan has transformed his argument for Turkey’s membership
from is doomed’. Mr one of civil rights, economic stability and
greater democracy to one couched in religious and `civilisational’ terms.
Businesspeople are also increasingly likely to lecture the EU – as they did
at a recent World Economic Forum conference in Istanbul – about how Europe
needs Turkey’s young workforce, which is mainly unskilled, and its market,
which is large but relatively poor. Some observers say this argument is
indicative of the sometimes overblown notions Turks harbour about their
country’s strategic importance and urge a little modesty. `We have to
remember that we are the ones who want to join the club,’ Ms Boyner says.
Others say the basis of Turkey’s engagement with and understanding of the EU
needs to adapt to today’s realities. `The pro-EU argument in Turkey is
overstated by its supporters,’ says Ercan Uygur, professor of economics at
Ankara University. He says it was shaped initially by a lack of information
about the EU and now by a misunderstanding of what the EU might mean for
Turkey.
The EU is a choice for Turkey that should not be based on a
misunderstanding. `When it comes to a choice – an informed choice – most
Turks would still choose the European Union,’ Prof Uygur says.
aa70-0000779e2340.html
Daily Georgian Times, Georgia
Jan 5 2007
Ethnic Armenians demand 5 member quota in de facto parliament
Ethnic Armenians are seriously preparing for the upcoming elections
of the de facto Abkhazian parliament scheduled for 4 March. At
present the Abkhazian parliament of 35 MPs has only one Armenian MP,
Galust Trapizonyan.
Armenian Diaspora in Abkhazia has filed a requiest in Abkhazian
government in which he demands five member quota in Abkhazian
parliament, which will be represented by Armenians.
Experts tie the strengthening of Armenian Diaspora in Abkhazia to the
weakened positions of de facto president Baghapsh, who has a serious
rival in the election race, vice-president Raul Khajimba. Khajimba is
Moscow’s favourite and in fact governs the unrecognized republic.
Baghapsh, predicting possible defeat in the upcoming elections, has
no other way but to rely on the support of ethnic Armenians, who
represent the majority of the breakaway region’s population.
14:43 28.12.2006
Permanent news address:
Expert: Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku project contradicts Georgia’s
interests The _Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku_ project contradicts
Georgia’s interests, as the main goal of the project initiated by
Ankara and Baku envisages turning Turkey into the key communication
center of the region, which indirectly supposes that role of Georgian
ports of Poti and Batumi will be reduced to zero, expert of Caucasus
Analytical Center _Aris Kazinyan_ believes.
According to him, despite the fact that officially the project is seen
in Georgia as a key factor of national security, however, in some
sense, the decision on participating in the project was imposed on
Tbilisi, so it is taken ambiguously by Georgia itself. Today many in
the country believe that the project decreases sharply Georgian
geopolitical opportunities and turns it into a kind of transit
state. As for Turkish position concerning the project, Kazinyan says,
an approach contrary to the Georgian one can be registered. In this
case, there is a traditional conflict of US and Turkish interests
involving the North-South corridor.
`The question is, Turkey is trying to minimize the role of Poti
andBatumi, and, as we can see, much money is being spent for it,’ the
expert says.
Besides, the USA factor is to be taken into account here. As Kazinyan
stressed, in this case, it is no matter to the USA what projects will
be implemented in the South-Caucasian region, the only requirement is
to provide the East-West direction instead of the North-South
one. This is the very reason why official Washington has shown a
restrained, to some extent, a pro-Armenian position concerning
effectiveness and prospects of laying the Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilis
railroad. To some extent, the USA supports approach of official
Yerevan concerning effectiveness of operating the railway between Kars
and Tbilisi via the Armenian Gyumri, as in this case it meets the
interests of the Armenian lobby and official Yerevan (on the one hand)
and provides for latitudinal direction of communications, on the other
hand.
The USA is mostly interested, as the expert says, in Georgia’s NATO
membership, as it will put an end to possibility of using the
North-South direction.
In general, according to Kazinyan, operation of the
Kars-Gyumri-Tbilisi railway could have been profitable for
Turkey. `First, it could be good will gesture for Armenia. Besides, it
would make it unnecessary spend $400 mln for construction of the
Kars-Akhalkalaki section,’ the expert says. Moreover, as Kazinyan
notes, Armenia will become a hostage as it will only join Azerbaijan
and Turkey and nothing more. `In this situation Armenia does not have
access to Russia, it is difficult to imagine that an Armenian train
could reach Russia bypassing 7-8 Azerbaijani provinces.’ According to
the expert, the only factor that makes Turkey disagree with the
variant is the prospective threat to its long-term interests that can
emerge in case the Georgian ports are modernized and a more stable
connection starts functioning between them and East-European Black Sea
ports.
© 1999-2007 REGNUM News Agency
PRESS RELEASE
Eastern Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America
138 East 39th Street
New York, NY 10016
Tel: 212-689-7810
Fax: 212-689-7168
e-mail: [email protected]
Website:
Contact: Iris Papazian
December 28, 2006
FAST OF THE NATIVITY; SIXTH SUNDAY OF ADVENT
This Sunday, December 31, is the sixth, and final, Sunday of Advent.
Tomorrow, Friday, December 29 is the Barekentan of the Fast of the Nativity.
There are ten week-long fasts that precede major feasts in the Armenian
Church. All of the Fasts are observed for five days, Monday through Friday,
except for the Fast of the Nativity which lasts 6 days, December 30 to
January 4.
VICAR WILL ATTEND INTERFAITH BREAKFAST
Bishop Anoushavan Tanielian, Vicar General of the Prelacy, will attend
an Interfaith Breakfast hosted by Mayor Michael Bloomberg at the New York
Public Library in Manhattan, tomorrow, Friday, December 29.
PRELATE WILL BE IN PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND
This Sunday, December 31, the Prelate, Archbishop Oshagan Choloyan,
will visit the Sts. Vartanantz Church parish in Providence, Rhode Island.
SAINTS’ DAYS THIS WEEK
In the Armenian Orthodox tradition, saints are commemorated on Mondays,
Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. This week there are a number of such
commemorations including the following:
Today, December 28, we commemorate the Holy Apostles James and John.
(Mark 10:35-41). They were nicknamed "Sons of Thunder" by Jesus because of
their excitable and quick-natured character. James was a Galilean fisherman
who was called along with his brother John to be one of the twelve apostles.
They, together with Peter, formed the inner core among the twelve who were
present at the raising of the daughter of Jairus, the transfiguration, and
the agony of Gethsemane. James is sometimes referred to as "James the
Greater" to differentiate from the other James. He was the first of the
apostles to be martyred, by order of King Herod Agrippa I, to please the
opponents of Christianity (Acts 12:1-2). He is the patron saint of Spain and
according to tradition his body was brought from Jerusalem to Spain to
Santiago de Compostela, which remains a popular destination for pilgrims.
John is called "the Divine." It was to John that Jesus from the cross
entrusted the care of his mother. Paul names John and James along with Peter
as the pillars of the church (Gal. 2:9).
On Saturday, December 30, we commemorate the Holy Fathers Basil of
Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, Sylvester of Rome and Ephrem the Syrian.
St. Basil (329-379) was a learned doctor and father of the Church, who
did much to spread Christianity. He became Bishop of Caesarea and a defender
of orthodox Christianity. He established many charitable projects such as
hospitals, hospitality inns for travelers, food kitchens for the needy, and
worked for prison reform.
Gregory of Nyssa (330-400), was the younger brother of Basil. He was
Bishop of Nyssa, and Archbishop of Sepastia. He participated in the second
ecumenical Council at Constantinople, where he was called "Father of the
Fathers." He was a pillar of orthodoxy and defender of the faith.
Sylvester of Rome, whose date of birth is not known, died in 335. He was
Bishop of Rome. During his pontificate he built great churches in Rome.
Ephrem the Syrian (306-373) was born in Mesopotamia and spent his entire
life there. He was baptized at age 18. He served under Saint James of
Nisibis, was head of his school, and most probably accompanied him to the
Council of Nicaea (325).
2007-A NEW YEAR
Monday, January 1, is the first day of the New Year (In Armenian Nor
Dari, Amanor or Gaghand). For many centuries the Armenians celebrated the
beginning of the New Year on the first day of the month of Navassard (August
11 in the current calendar). It was in the 18th century that the Armenians
(by decree of Catholicos Simeon Erevantsi) accepted January 1 as the start
of the New Year. The New Year is a time of joy, happiness and festivities.
Traditionally Armenians exchange gifts on New Year’s Day, rather than
Christmas. It is a time to celebrate the renewal of life and prosperity, to
put aside anger and grudges, and renew friendships through mutual
visitations. Lavish tables including dried fruits and nuts are part of the
commemorative traditions.
BIBLE READINGS FOR 2007
The daily Bible readings for 2007, according to the liturgical calendar
of the Armenian Church, are on the Prelacy web page. For this week’s
readings click
THE BIBLE ON OUR LIPS
We use phrases from the Bible (especially from the King James Version)
every day, at times without realizing the source. Some years ago, Bruce
Metzger, a scholar at Princeton Theology Seminary, creatively showed how
much the Bible has influenced Western culture. Here’s a small sampling:
A person may be said to behave like the great "I Am" (Ex. 3:14), or to
have "the mark of Cain" (Gen. 4:15). People are tempted to eat forbidden
fruit (Gen. 2:17), desire the fleshpots of Egypt (Ex. 16:3), and give up
something worth having for a mess of pottage (Gen. 25:29-34).
Yet "one does not live by bread alone" (Deut. 8:3), and finally each
must go the way of all flesh (cf. Gen. 6:12; Josh. 23:14) and return to dust
(Gen. 3:19). For the moment, those who find themselves "at their wits end"
(Ps. 107:27) may still escape by the "skin of their teeth" (Job 19:20), but
others find themselves in the position of a "scapegoat" (Lev. 16:8-10).
Nevertheless, "a soft answer turns away wrath" (Prov. 15:1).
Unfortunately, a leopard cannot change its spots (Jer. 13:23). The
wicked "sow the wind and reap the whirlwind" (Hos. 8:7), and because they
ignore the "writing on the wall" (Dan. 5:24), they are fated "to lick the
dust" (Ps. 72:9). Inevitably, "pride goeth.before a fall" (Prov. 16:18), and
anything that hinders success is a "fly in the ointment" (Eccles. 10:1). The
wise know that "you can’t take it with you" (Eccles. 5:15), and that "there
is nothing new under the sun" (Eccles. 1:9).
Who has not known a "good Samaritan" (Luke 10:30-37), a person who will
"go a second mile" (Matt. 5:38). Some seek the "pearl of great price" (Matt.
13:46), while others, like the Prodigal Son, waste their lives "in riotous
living" (Lk. 6:24). "A house divided against itself will not stand" (Mk.
3:25), nor can "the blind lead the blind" (Mt. 15:14). It is useless to
"cast pearls before swine" (Mt. 7:6).
In antiquity a "talent" was a unit of weight or money, but because of
Jesus’ Parable of the Talents (Mt. 25:14-30), the word has come to mean
natural endowment or ability. To disregard these abilities is to "hide one’s
light under a bushel" (Mt. 5:15). Even those who have never opened a Bible
recognize the Golden Rule of doing to "others as we would have them do to
us" (Mt. 7:12).
Finally, expressions from the letters of Paul: "The letter kills, but
the spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:3); "The love of money is the root of all
evil" (1 Tim. 6:10); "To see through a glass darkly" (1 Cor. 13:12); and "a
thorn in the flesh" (2 Cor. 12:7).
NEXT ISSUE OF CROSSROADS
The next issue of Crossroads (Thursday, January 4) will be a special
Christmas issue. Until then.Happy New Year to all.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
December 31-New Year’s Eve Dinner-Dance, Sts. Vartanantz Church, Ridgefield,
New Jersey and ARF Dro Gomideh, Parsippany Hilton, New Jersey. Featuring
Arthur Apkarian and Armenia Band. For full information contact the church
office 201-943-2950.
December 31-New Year’s Eve Party, St. Sarkis Armenian Church, Douglaston,
New York.
December 31-New Year’s Eve Party, St. Gregory Illuminator Armenian Church,
Granite City, Illinois.
January 6-St. Gregory the Illuminator Church, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
first Episcopal Badarak in Philadelphia by Bishop Anoushavan Tanielian.
January 6-Sts. Vartanantz Church, Ridgefield, New Jersey, annual Christmas
luncheon hosted by the Ladies’ Guild following church services on Saturday,
January 6. Adults $15; children 12 and under $10. For
reservations/information, 201-943-2950.
January 6-St. Sarkis Church, Douglaston, New York, Christmas party and
special program for Saturday and Sunday school students.
January 28-Annual Membership Meeting, Soorp Khatch Church, Bethesda,
Maryland, at 1 pm.
February 4-St. Sarkis name day, celebrating the patron saint of the church
and requiem service for Archpriest Rev. Fr. Asoghik Kelejian, St. Sarkis
Church, Douglaston, New York.
February 11-General Membership meeting and elections, St. Sarkis Church,
Douglaston, New York.
February 17-St. Gregory Church, North Andover, Massachusetts, Annual
Membership Meeting.
February 18-Poon Paregentan, Eve of Great Lent, International Cuisine Night,
St. Sarkis Church, Douglaston, New York.
March 25-Musical Armenia 2007, Weill Recital Hall, Carnegie Hall, 2 pm.
Featured artists: Aleksandr Nazaryan (viola) and Serge Barseghian (basso).
Visit our website at
TURKEY AND THE EU
Washington Times, DC
Dec 26 2006
The European Union did itself a disservice this month with
a decision to suspend eight of the 35 "chapters" of Turkey’s
accession negotiations, the most recent in a series of episodes that
suggest Europe is distancing itself from Turkey. The Turks have been
increasingly frustrated by what they perceive as a double standard
applied to their country’s membership bid, and popular opinion in
Turkey is turning increasingly against the process. The successful
accession would help solidify Turkey as a Western-oriented democracy in
the Muslim world, while a failure would be damaging to its relationship
with Western allies and to the Turkish republic itself.
Economic and political reforms are challenging to accomplish in Turkey,
but the carrot of EU accession makes difficult reforms more palatable
and politically feasible. The EU process also establishes a structural
framework for Turkey’s reforms, for which the entry requirements can
be tremendously valuable as a guide. But if the requirements are set
so as to preclude Turkish membership rather than to encourage and
direct Turkish reforms, the entire process becomes unproductive —
or, at worst, counterproductive by turning Turkey to the East.
The eight "chapters" were suspended this month because of a deadlock
over the Cyprus issue, the decades-old conflict between ethnic Turks
in the north and Greek Cypriots in the south of the island. Turkey
has refused to open its ports to trade with Cyprus, an EU member that
Turkey does not recognize. The EU, in turn, maintains an embargo on the
Turkish-occupied northern part of the divided island. Resolving this
contentious issue is complicated, but it need not cause an impasse
in Turkey’s membership talks. A late proposal from Turkey to open
two ports to trade with Cyprus for a year had merit, at least in as
much as it would have offered a one-step-forward alternative to the
suspension of negotiations.
Heading into an election year in Turkey adds another dimension.
For one, the EU shouldn’t expect Turkish politicians to concede much
on the issues of Cyprus or the Armenian genocide, a dark chapter
in Turkey’s history that the government has not revisited. A rebuff
from Europe to some extent reflects poorly on the ruling Justice and
Development Party (AKP), the leading supporter of EU accession. The
Republican People’s Party (CHP) — AKP’s sole opposition in parliament,
and the best contender to overtake AKP in 2007 — has opposed EU
accession, contrary to the position its own ideology would seem to
dictate, largely because of its role as sole parliamentary minority
party and its chosen course of reflexive opposition to any AKP
initiative.
When the dust from the accession process settles many years down
the road, and Turkey has either joined the EU with full or partial
membership — or has not joined — an undeniably important measure
of the process will be the extent to which Turkey has continued to
enact economic and political reforms that bring it more in line with
its Western allies than its Eastern neighbors. Turkey feels the pull
between two poles: a secular and democratic Europe and a hostile,
undemocratic Middle East. The more it appears that Europe is trying
to close the door to membership, the more likely Turkey will embrace
a more Islamist Middle East. This is a strategic blunder that the
West should not allow to happen.