Author: Jalatian Sonya

Le Monde, France
22 octobre 2004
Turquie : paroles, paroles… ;
HORIZONS DEBATS
par Robert Badinter
LE débat de l’Assemblée nationale sur l’ouverture des négociations
d’adhésion de la Turquie à l’Union européenne s’est avéré dérisoire
et confus. Dérisoire, parce que ce débat, bclé devant un Hémicycle
déserté faute de s’achever par un vote, ne pouvait déboucher sur
aucune décision politique. Confus, parce que l’exercice oratoire
auquel s’est livré le premier ministre n’a fait que renforcer le
sentiment d’ambiguïté sur la position de la France. Dans son
discours, M. Raffarin a martelé que « l’adhésion de la Turquie à
l’Union européenne n’est pas possible, ni aujourd’hui, ni demain, ni
dans les prochaines années », répétant que « ni l’Europe ni la
Turquie ne sont prêtes à l’adhésion ». Il ajouta : « L’avenir n’est
écrit nulle part. (…) C’est l’histoire qui tranchera » ( sic ). Et
conclut : « Adressons aux Françaises et aux Français un message sur
la Turquie en Europe : si un jour la question est posée, le peuple
est souverain, il en décidera… » « Paroles, paroles… », a-t-on
envie de s’exclamer, à l’instar d’une chanteuse célèbre !
Le président de la République a, lui aussi, tenu à multiplier les
propos apaisants à l’intention des Français inquiets de la
perspective de l’entrée dans l’UE d’un vaste Etat dont 97 % du
territoire s’étend en Asie mineure, et dont la population de 70
millions d’habitants dispose d’un revenu moyen égal à 25 % de celui
de l’Union. Il a souligné que cette perspective était lointaine,
qu’elle s’inscrivait à l’horizon 2015 – ou plus tard – et, surtout,
que les Français seraient maîtres de la décision ultime, puisqu’ils
seraient appelés à se prononcer par référendum.
En vérité, ces déclarations lénifiantes ne sont que leurre. Le choix
du chef de l’Etat est déjà fait. C’est un « oui » de principe à
l’adhésion de la Turquie. Son attitude, et celle du gouvernement,
aujourd’hui, ne sont destinées qu’à éviter que le mécontentement des
Français à ce sujet se porte sur la question, toute différente
pourtant, de l’adoption du traité constitutionnel, et qu’ils refusent
celui-ci faute d’avoir été saisis de celui-là.
Que la Turquie ait, en effet, vocation, pour le président de la
République, à entrer dans l’UE, non seulement ses propos, mais ses
choix, notamment au sein du Conseil européen, en témoignent. En fait,
c’est seulement à partir de 1997 que l’éventualité d’une candidature
de la Turquie a été réellement prise en considération par l’Union
européenne.
Dès le Conseil européen d’Helsinki, en 1999, il a été admis que la
demande de la Turquie serait jugée sur les mêmes critères que les
autres candidatures. C’était faire un grand avantage à la Turquie que
délibérément fermer les yeux sur ses caractéristiques propres : sa
situation géographique, son poids démographique, ses spécificités
culturelles et sociales. A-t-on débattu en France de cette approche
devant le Parlement, sinon devant l’opinion ? Jamais. En décembre
2002, le Conseil européen décida que, selon l’avis de la Commission,
« si la Turquie satisfait aux critères de Copenhague, l’UE ouvrira,
sans délai, les négociations d’adhésion avec ce pays ».
Cette décision du Conseil européen de 2002 n’était rien d’autre qu’un
« oui », sous condition suspensive à l’ouverture des négociations
d’adhésion avec la Turquie. Qu’elle remplisse cette condition et le «
oui » devenait définitif. La question essentielle, première – la
Turquie a-t-elle vocation à entrer dans l’Union européenne ? -, était
ainsi escamotée au profit d’une autre, seconde : la Turquie
satisfait-elle aux critères de Copenhague ?
Vainement déclare-t-on que l’admission d’une candidature n’est pas
l’admission dans l’Union, qu’il ne s’agit-là que de l’ouverture de
négociations avec le candidat. « Paroles, paroles… » Aucun
candidat, depuis trente ans, ne s’est vu refuser l’entrée dans la
Communauté. La voie peut être ardue, mais, une fois la feuille de
route tracée, l’issue est certaine. L’Etat candidat se retrouvera, à
plus ou moins longue échéance, membre de l’Union. Il en ira ainsi de
la Turquie comme de ses prédécesseurs.
C’est pourquoi l’évocation d’un référendum obligatoire pour la
ratification par la France du traité d’adhésion de la Turquie à l’UE
apparaît comme une mascarade. Car, après dix ou quinze ans de
négociations et d’efforts de la Turquie pour transformer sa
législation et absorber ce qu’on appelle l’acquis communautaire, il
sera impossible alors, pour la France, de dire non à ce pays sans
déclencher une réaction formidable d’indignation des Turcs et une
crise diplomatique grave. Le chef de l’Etat le sait bien. Cette
révision constitutionnelle annoncée, ce référendum obligatoire dans
dix ou quinze ans ne sont que poudre aux yeux. En réalité, c’est en
décembre, au prochain Conseil européen, que le pas décisif sera
franchi. On peut même dire que le choix a été déjà fait en 2002,
quand le « oui », sous condition suspensive, a été formulé à l’égard
de la candidature de la Turquie à l’Union.
C’était à ce moment-là que la question de principe – la France
doit-elle accepter que la Turquie entre dans l’UE comme membre à part
entière, ou préfère-t-elle la voie d’un partenariat privilégié ? –
devait être clairement posée et soumise au Parlement. Le président de
la République, par tempérament ou par commodité politique, s’est bien
gardé d’ouvrir ce grand débat.
Aujourd’hui, les hasards du calendrier font que, au moment où la
question de la ratification du traité constitutionnel va être soumise
au référendum, la question, toute différente, de l’élargissement de
l’UE à la Turquie apparaît sur le devant de la scène politique. Elle
ne pourra pas être refoulée par des précautions oratoires et des
habiletés constitutionnelles. Et il y a lieu de craindre que,
exaspérés par la perspective de l’élargissement de l’Union jusqu’aux
frontières de l’Arménie, de l’Irak, de l’Iran, de la Syrie, les
Français, se sentant abusés par leurs dirigeants et particulièrement
par le chef de l’Etat, rejettent le traité constitutionnel pour
exprimer leur refus de l’entrée de la Turquie dans l’Union.
M. Chirac s’était indigné de ce que le président Bush se fasse le
premier champion de l’entrée de la Turquie dans l’UE. Il aurait été
avisé de s’interroger plus avant sur cette insistance, dont le
premier motif n’était certes pas de renforcer l’Union européenne, ni
de contribuer à la naissance d’une Europe-puissance, ce projet des
Pères fondateurs dont, aujourd’hui, on nous invite à faire notre
deuil.
NOTES: robert badinter, ancien ministre de la justice, ancien
président du Conseil constitutionnel, est sénateur (PS) des
Hauts-de-Seine.

Le Monde
19 octobre 2004
Si le Conseil européen revient sur sa parole, ce sera très grave »

Kemal Dervis, ancien ministre, député d’Istanbul, au « Grand jury
RTL-«Le Monde»-LCI »
Propos recueillis par Gérard Courtois, Ruth Elkrief et Pierre-Luc
Séguillon
Les inquiétudes provoquées en France par la perspective des
négociations d’adhésion de la Turquie à l’Union européenne vous
font-elles craindre que Jacques Chirac revienne sur ses engagements ?
C’est normal qu’il y ait débat. Et je pense que le président Jacques
Chirac, jusqu’à aujourd’hui, s’en est tenu à sa parole. Mais il faut
que les gens tiennent parole ; c’est la base de toute confiance.
N’êtes-vous pas déçu par les critiques exprimées en France à l’égard
de la Turquie ?
Les citoyens veulent comprendre ce qui se passe et ils ont raison. Il
faut leur donner des éléments et un peu de temps.
Beaucoup de responsables français suggèrent qu’un partenariat
privilégié serait préférable à une adhésion en bonne et due forme.
Qu’en pensez-vous ?
Le statut privilégié proposé par certains n’est pas un objectif de
négociation qu’on puisse accepter. Car personne n’arrive à définir ce
privilège : si c’est de ne pas voter au Parlement européen et de
n’avoir pas de voix au Conseil européen, ce n’est pas un privilège,
c’est une sorte de deuxième classe.
La Commission européenne elle-même, dans son rapport favorable à
l’ouverture des négociations, envisage que celles-ci puissent être
suspendues…
Ça ne me choque pas. Négocier ne veut pas nécessairement dire
aboutir. Je n’aimerais pas que cela arrive, mais la Turquie aussi
pourrait dire « On arrête » ; le droit est des deux côtés.
Que se passerait-il si le Conseil européen du 17 décembre ne fixait
pas de date pour l’ouverture des négociations ?
Si le Conseil européen revient sur sa parole, solennelle et unanime,
ce sera très grave. Il y a deux ans, il a décidé que les négociations
commenceraient « sans délai » en cas de feu vert de la Commission. Il
faut donc qu’elles démarrent le plus tôt possible, dans trois mois,
dans six mois après la décision du Conseil. Nous nous y attendons. Si
l’Europe revient là-dessus, il y aura un gros problème et une
réaction très forte en Turquie, très émotive.
La Commission estime qu’il faudra confirmer la solidité des réformes
démocratiques engagées en Turquie. Ce processus de réforme vous
semble-t-il irréversible ?
Ce n’est pas seulement le gouvernement, mais la nation turque tout
entière qui est engagée dans le projet européen et le projet de
démocratie approfondie. Ces réformes sont absolument sincères. Mais
c’est vrai que les habitudes ne peuvent changer du jour au lendemain.
Certaines lois ont été appliquées pendant des décennies. Il faut que
les juges, la police, tout le monde intériorise cette nouvelle donne.
Dans les années 1970, il y a eu un gouvernement de colonels en Grèce,
c’était encore le fascisme en Espagne et au Portugal, la dictature en
Europe de l’Est. Il y a eu beaucoup de progrès dans toute cette
périphérie européenne. Le message démocratique de l’Europe est très
puissant.
Un des points d’achoppement entre l’Europe et la Turquie est celui de
la reconnaissance du génocide arménien, en 1915- 1917. Contestez-vous
qu’il y ait eu génocide ?
J’aimerais saisir cette occasion pour exprimer une douleur profonde
pour les massacres d’Arméniens qui ont eu lieu pendant la première
guerre mondiale. Il faut reconnaître ces souffrances et exprimer un
très profond regret, sans oublier non plus les massacres de musulmans
de l’autre côté. Mais il faut dépasser ces mémoires historiques.
Sinon, on ne rend pas service à la paix. Or l’idée forte de l’Europe
est justement qu’elle est une puissance de paix.

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
CROSSROADS E-NEWSLETTER – October 14, 2004
VEHAMAYR OVSANNA SARKISSIAN
IS LAID TO REST IN CANADA
Last week we received the news of the passing of Vehamayr Ovsanna
Sarkissian, the mother of Catholicos Karekin I, of blessed memory. The
viewing (Dangark) and funeral services took place October 4 and 5 at Holy
Trinity Armenian Church in Toronto. Vehamayr celebrated her 100th birthday
less than two months ago.
Archbishop Oshagan conveyed his condolences to her family on behalf of the
Eastern Prelacy.
RECEPTION FOR PILLARS OF THE PRELACY
THIS SATURDAY IN NEW YORK
A reception for the Pillars of the Prelacy will take place this Saturday
evening, October 16, at the Prelacy, 138 E. 39th Street, New York City. A
large number of Pillars from the Northeast are expected to attend the event,
which is meant to express thanks and appreciation to the Pillars.
PRELATE WILL VISIT NEW BRITAIN
PARISH THIS SUNDAY
Archbishop Oshagan, Prelate, will visit the St. Stephen’s Armenian Apostolic
Church in New Britain, Connecticut, this Sunday, October 17. His Eminence
will officiate at the Divine Liturgy and attend the church’s 79th
anniversary celebration. The parish will honor the memory of its founding
fathers. His Eminence will present a Certificate of Merit to parishioner
Shirley Kevorkian and a Junior Achievement Award to Richie Meyer.
LIFE AND WORK OF ARCHBISHOP MESROB ASHJIAN
WILL BE REMEMBERED TOMORROW EVENING
In less than two months the first anniversary of the passing of His Eminence
Archbishop Mesrob Ashjian will be marked with appropriate requiem services
in all Prelacy churches. Here in New York, where he served as the leader of
the Eastern Prelacy for twenty years, his life and work will be remembered
in a Memorial Tribute tomorrow evening, October 15. The program will take
place at St. Peter Church, 619 Lexington Avenue (at 54th Street), at 7:30
pm.
Organized by the Hamazkayin of New York, the tribute is under the auspices
of His Eminence Archbishop Oshagan Choloyan. The commemoration will feature
addresses by Dr. Ashot Melkonian, Director of the Institute of History of
the Academy of Sciences in Armenia, and the Honorable Judge Sarkis Teshoian,
who served as chairman of the Prelacy’s Executive Council during the
Archbishop’s tenure.
The cultural portion of the evening will feature the well-known singer
Hasmik Mekhanedjian and Janet Marcarian on the organ. Mrs. Arevig Caprielian
will deliver the opening words of welcome and Dr. Herand Markarian will
serve as the master of ceremonies.
Perhaps the most poignant portion of the program will be a video
presentation of the “Life and Work of Archbishop Mesrob Ashjian.” The video
presentation was prepared with the use of archival still photographs and
videos. It is narrated in the words of the Archbishop, in his own voice.
Archbishop Oshagan will deliver the concluding message and the benediction.
For information: 718-459-2757.
NEW ENGLAND AREA RETREAT: WE ARE FAMILY
WILL TAKE PLACE NEXT WEEKEND
We remind our readers in New England that the regional retreat, We Are
Family, will take place on Saturday, October 23, at the E. Kent Swift Estate
in Whitinsville, Massachusetts, sponsored by the Armenian Religious
Education Council (AREC). For information contact your local parish.
NEW ENGLAND EDUCATORS SEMINAR
NEXT SATURDAY
The New England Educators Seminar sponsored by the Armenian National
Education Committee (ANEC) will take place next Saturday, October 23, 2 pm.
The seminar is hosted by the Mourad School of Providence, Rhode Island. The
theme is Teaching Armenian and History and Teaching Methods for the
Non-Armenian Speaker. For information contact the ANEC office, 212-689-7810.
FIVE SESSION COURSE ON THE LITURGY
BEGINS MONDAY
The first of the five-session course on the Divine Liturgy will take place
this Monday, October 18, and continue on the first and third Mondays of the
month, for a total of five sessions. The course is presented by Dn. Shant
Kazanjian, Executive Director of the Armenian Religious Education Council.
For details go to:
ORDINATIONS IN ANTELIAS
The ordinations of Dn. Serop Terterian and Dn. Vatche Bozoyan will take
place this Saturday and Sunday, October 16 and 17, in the Cathedral of St.
Nishan in Beirut, Lebanon. Bishop Kegham Khacherian, Prelate of Lebanon,
will officiate over the ordination services. The newly ordained clergymen
will subsequently serve within the Eastern Prelacy.
CATHOLICOS ARAM I RECEIVES HIGHEST
HONOR FROM CHURCH OF SWEDEN
His Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia, received the
highest award given by the Church of Sweden, during a dinner given in his
honor in Uppsala, Sweden on October 2. The award was presented by the head
of the Church of Sweden, Archbishop K. G. Hammar.
In presenting the award, Archbishop Hammar said, Only three individuals have
received this award, and you are the fourth. We decided to present this
award to you in recognition and appreciation of your important contribution
to the worldwide Ecumenical Movement.
DIALOGUE AND COOPERATION AMONG RELIGIONS
ESSENTIAL FOR THE WORLD TODAY, SAYS ARAM I
Hundreds of students, professors, and Swedish citizens attended a lecture
delivered by His Holiness Aram I, at the University of Uppsala, Sweden. His
Holiness lectured on inter-religious dialogue and its effect on the
Ecumenical Movement. He noted that dialogue and cooperation among religions
is essential for the world today. His lecture centered on three main points:
Living Together, Conferring Together, and Working Together.
His Holiness was invited to visit Sweden by the Church of Sweden. During his
visit he attended high-level meetings with the head of the Lutheran Church
of Sweden, Archbishop K. G. Hammar.
FORMER MAYOR OF STEPANAGERT
WILL VISIT THE PRELACY
Maxim Merzoyan, the former mayor of Stepanagert, will visit Archbishop
Oshagan this Saturday afternoon, October 16, at the Prelacy offices in New
York City. Antranig Kasbarian, Nagorno-Karabagh Program Director for the
Tufenkian Foundation, Inc, will accompany the mayor.
CHRISTMAS IN THE BIG APPLE:
THE PRELACY WILL SPONSOR FAMILY CONCERT
Is it too early to talk about Christmas? Probably, because here at
Crossroads we are generally more concerned with immediate happenings. But it
is not too early for you to mark December 4 on your calendar, the date of a
Family Christmas Concert featuring Nvair and Taline, sponsored by the
Prelacy at the Alliance Francaise in New York City. For details go to:
HOLY EVANGELISTS: MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, JOHN
This Saturday, October 16, the Armenian Church commemorates the Holy
Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the authors of the four gospels.
The word comes from the Greek euangelos, meaning a messenger (or angel)
bringing good news.
As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the
tax office; and he said to him, Follow me. And he rose and followed him.”
(Matthew 9:9).
St. Matthew is considered to be the patron of the mission of the Church. The
Gospel attributed to him closes with this command by Jesus to his disciples
and followers: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, and the
eternal words, And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.
St. Mark through his gospel narrative is considered to have had significant
influence on the advancement of Christianity. Although the Gospel according
to Mark is a narrative of the life of Jesus, theologians consider it to be a
virtual handbook of discipleship. The overriding message is that being a
Christian is not only believing in Jesus Christ. More importantly, it is
living according to the example set by Jesus.
St. Luke is the author of the third gospel and the Book of Acts. He is
considered to be the patron of physicians and artists. The Gospel according
to Luke is greatly concerned with Jesus as the healer of a broken world.
Luke is also noted for his concern for the poor, the marginalized, women,
and social outcasts. His Gospel does not end with the Resurrection, but
rather continues with Pentecost and the eternal presence of Christ in the
world.
St. John, often called the Beloved Disciple, is the author of the Fourth
Gospel and the Book of Revelation. Jesus entrusted his mother to John on the
day of the Crucifixion.
Perhaps the most famous verse in his Gospel is, For God so loved the world
that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish
but have eternal life, (John 3:16). According to tradition John outlived
the other twelve disciples. He escaped martyrdom and was sent into exile on
the island of Patmos, where he wrote the Book of Revelation.
AND FINALLY.
Since we are discussing biblical authors, we leave you this week with the
following about biblical authors and venues:
The Bible was written,
In the Wilderness by Moses.
In the Palace by David.
In the Field by Amos.
In Babylon by Daniel.
In Jerusalem by James.
On the Road by Paul.
In Prison by Paul.
In Patmos by John.
Visit our website at

Armenian Assembly of America
122 C Street, NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-393-3434
Fax: 202-638-4904
Email: [email protected]
Web:
PRESS RELEASE
October 9, 2004
CONTACT: Christine Kojoian
E-mail: [email protected]
ASSEMBLY HAILS HOUSE PASSAGE OF ARMENIA PNTR BILL
Senate Set to Vote Next
Washington, DC – One of the Armenian Assembly’s highest priorities –
normalizing trade relations between the United States and Armenia – won
passage in the House of Representatives late last night as part of a
comprehensive trade measure, known as the Miscellaneous Trade and
Technical Corrections Act
“The Assembly welcomes tonight’s action passing Armenia PNTR and thanks
House Ways and Committee Chairman Bill Thomas for his crucial support,”
said Assembly Board of Trustees Chairman Hirair Hovnanian. “We commend
him and the Armenian Caucus Co-Chairmen Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) and Frank
Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) for their leadership and steadfast efforts to deepen
the U.S.-Armenia trade relationship.”

“The ongoing Turkish and Azeri blockades are two strikes against Armenia’s
ability to prosper as a free-market economy, so any U.S. trade benefits,
such as those resulting from the removal of the trade restrictions, are
helpful,” Hovnanian added. “It is our hope the Senate will pass this
legislation at its earliest opportunity.”

PNTR, known as “permanent normal trade relations” would remove a nearly
30-year-old provision requiring Armenia and other countries to
periodically obtain presidential approval for continued access to low
tariffs. In so doing, it would signal an upgrade in Armenia’s status as a
trading partner and should lead to additional trade agreements between the
United States and Armenia
Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues Co-Chairmen Joe Knollenberg (R-MI)
and Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) first introduced the legislation known as
H.R. 528 in February 2003, which passed the House of Representatives later
that year. The Assembly for its part, helped push the measure through by
working to secure the co-sponsorship of more than 100 lawmakers from both
sides of the political aisle.
“The PNTR bill has been an Assembly priority throughout the 108th Congress
and when enacted will be the first Armenia specific legislation passed
since the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act in 1996,” said Assembly Board of
Directors Chairman Anthony Barsamian. “The efforts of the bill’s sponsor
Joe Knollenberg, along with Reps. William Thomas and Frank Pallone, Jr.
also paved its passage. Key support from Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY),
the ranking Democrat on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee was
also instrumental.”
Last year, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) along with Senators Paul
Sarbanes (D-MD) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced S. 1557, which was
modeled after the House version of Armenia PNTR. This measure has the
bipartisan support of over 20 cosponsors.
“The Assembly thanks Senators McConnell, Sarbanes and Boxer for helping
strengthen U.S.-Armenia trade relations,” said Hovnanian. “We also
greatly appreciate Senators McConnell and Sarbanes for raising the issue
and discussing the merits of the bill during a pan-Armenian conference
held by the Assembly, AGBU and Eastern and Western Diocese of the Armenian
Church.”
During that same conference, the Bush Administration made its first public
endorsement of the trade bill. Ambassador Elizabeth Jones, Assistant
Secretary of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, who delivered
the news, said “The U.S. government supports extending Permanent Normal
Trade Relations to Armenia and will support Congressional efforts to
graduate Armenia from the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Act.”
Last April, Hovnanian together with former Board of Directors Chairman
Peter Vosbikian sent a letter Congressman Philip M. Crane (R-IL), Chairman
of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, calling for the
extension of PNTR to Armenia and stated that the country is an
increasingly important partner for the U.S. and poised to play a pivotal
role as a commercial hub.
The Assembly also designed an aggressive campaign that hinged on the
support of the Armenian community. Part of the strategy included a phone
banking session last summer in which the Assembly contacted
Armenian-American constituents across the nation, urging them to call
their Members of Congress and support Armenia PNTR.
The PTNR issue was also at the forefront of every community forum, in
cities and towns across the U.S. Assembly Board Members and staff
provided legislative updates and answered questions regarding the bill and
its benefits for Armenia. They reminded activists, for example, that
although Armenia acceded into the World Trade Organization (WTO), a
144-member international trade body, in February 2003, the full benefits
of accession would not be realized unless PNTR was granted.
(Participation in the Geneva-based organization will offer Armenia lower
trade barriers and increased opportunity for trade.) The Assembly touted
the government of Armenia’s economic reforms which led to its entry in the
WTO.
The next step in the legislative process is for the Senate to vote.
The Armenian Assembly of America is the largest Washington-based
nationwide organization promoting public understanding and awareness of
Armenian issues. It is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt membership organization.

###
NR#2004-093

Burlington Union, MA
Oct 8 2004
Armenian fashions on display in Lexington
Students of the Yerevan State Academy of Fine Arts and their
instructors will present fashions from Armenia in New England on
Sunday, Oct. 10, at 5 p.m. at National Heritage Museum in Lexington.
This event, the first of its kind to be held in the U.S., has peaked
public interest.

Coordinating the program will be four accomplished designers
from Armenia who will present their unique fashions. Nune Aghbalyan
and Anna Panosyan, instructors at the Academy’s Textile Department,
have resumes that include degrees and design coursework in Berlin,
Paris and Barcelona. Kevork Chadoian, 30-year-old, brilliant designer
and 2004 graduate from the Academy will present an elegantly designed
“Armenian Wedding Suite.” ATEX Fashion Salon proprietor Karine
Hakobyan will show her beautiful collection which will include unique
fashions embellished with Marash and Aintab embroideries.

The Fashion and Textile Design Chair was joined to the Design
Department of the Academy in 1999 after overcoming great hardships.
The department aims to give students a sound education, emphasizing
theory and practice a free way of thinking about composition, and
insight on how to find correct functional solutions.

La Croix
5 octobre 2004
Dossier. La Turquie aux portes de l’Union Européenne. Les Eglises
posent le problème de la liberté de culte. Les chrétiens de Turquie
se placent sur le terrain du respect de la liberté religieuse.
GAULMYN Isabelle de
A Leeds (Angleterre), ce week-end, lors de l’assemblée générale du
Conseil des conférences épiscopales d’Europe (CCEE), il ne fut pas
question de l’adhésion de la Turquie. Du moins officiellement. Car,
dans les couloirs, les conversations sur le sujet n’ont pas manqué,
note Mgr Louis-Armel Peltre, vicaire apostolique d’Istamboul, qui y
représentait les évêques catholiques de Turquie : Beaucoup sont venus
m’en parler. Il était facile de deviner que, sur ce sujet, tous n’ont
pas la même opinion. Mgr Peltre a donc rappelé à ses confrères que
la Conférence des évêques de Turquie (CET) n’avait pas pris de
position officielle : Nous restons en retrait par rapport aux
responsables du patriarcat oecuménique de Constantinople et de
l’Eglise apostolique arménienne, qui représentent la grande majorité
des chrétiens en Turquie. Le premier, le patriarche Bartholomeos Ier,
s’est depuis longtemps prononcé pour. Le second aussi, mais avec plus
d’hésitations.
Pour autant, poursuit Mgr Peltre, les catholiques de Turquie sont
favorables à l’adhésion du pays. · Leeds, j’ai expliqué aux évêques
que nous en espérions une amélioration de notre situation . Les
responsables catholiques turcs vivent mal les réticences feutrées de
nombre de leurs confrères européens. Il est faux de présenter les
musulmans turcs comme formant un ensemble monolithique, où tous
seraient contre la liberté religieuse des chrétiens, ajoute l’évêque.
Au contraire. Les réticences de la Turquie ne doivent pas alimenter
une islamophobie.
Tel est le piège. Si des responsables chrétiens s’expriment à propos
de la Turquie, leur position est immédiatement interprétée en termes
religieux. Et les Turcs, qui font du lobbying pour leur adhésion à
l’Europe, ont vite fait de caricaturer ainsi nos positions. Sans
oublier que ce débat suit la polémique sur l’héritage chrétien de
l’Europe , souligne un observateur de l’Eglise allemande. D’où, sans
doute, la prudence de cette dernière, concernée au premier chef du
fait de l’existence d’une importante communauté turque sur son sol.
Lors de l’assemblée plénière des évêques allemands, fin septembre, le
cardinal Karl Leh mann, président de la Conférence épiscopale, s’en
est donc tenu à une position de principe concernant le respect de la
liberté religieuse. Il a rappelé que l’observation des critères de
Copenhague, y compris, donc, ceux qui concernaient la liberté
religieuse, individuelle comme collective , devait impérativement
être respectée.
L’évêque de Mayence a cependant insisté, demandant que les droits qui
sont reconnus en Allemagne aux musulmans turcs soient, au moins
progressivement, accordés aux chrétiens qui vivent en Turquie . La
liberté religieuse doit être respectée comme marque de l’identité
démocratique européenne , a martelé le cardinal Lehmann, évitant
soigneusement la question de la légitimité de l’appartenance de la
Turquie à l’ensemble européen.
Même prudence à Rome. En février, Jean-Paul II, recevant
l’ambassadeur de Turquie, avait évoqué le sujet de la reconnaissance
du statut juridique de l’Eglise. Mais le cardinal Sodano, secrétaire
d’Etat, a affirmé jeudi que le Saint-Siège se devait de rester neutre
sur l’adhésion de la Turquie : Nous ne pouvons pas dire à la Suisse
qu’elle ne doit pas adhérer, à la Turquie qu’elle ne peut pas entrer,
et à l’Ukraine qu’elle le peut , a expliqué le numéro deux du
Vatican. En juillet cependant, le cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, préfet
de la Congrégation pour la doctrine de la foi, avait qualifié une
probable intégration d’ énorme erreur dans un entretien au Figaro
Magazine.
Ces hésitations et nuances traversent les autres Eglises européennes.
Au sein de la Conférence des Eglises européennes (KEK, 130 Eglises
protestantes, orthodoxes et anglicanes), on trouve toutes les nuances
d’expression, de l’opposition virulente du primat orthodoxe de Grèce
à d’autres plus ouvertes. Ainsi, pour le pasteur Jean-Arnold de
Clermont, président de la KEK et de la Fédération protestante de
France, si le critère géographique ne peut être opposé pour refuser
l’entrée de la Turquie en Europe, encore faut-il, dans ce cas, poser
le problème de l’adhésion de la Serbie, de l’Albanie, du Kosovo .
Mais, ajoute-t-il, il faut alors être sérieux sur le respect des
critères de Copenhague, et notamment entendre la voix des Eglises
minoritaires . Enfin, conclut le pasteur, cela passe, au plan
culturel, par une réconciliation des mémoires. La Turquie doit
reconnaître le génocide arménien. Et elle ne peut faire comme s’il
n’y avait pas eu d’Empire ottoman .
Sans surprise, d’ailleurs, c’est bien au sein des Eglises de ces pays
de l’ex-empire ou aux marges de celui-ci – Autriche, Hongrie et
Pologne – que les réticences sont les plus grandes.
ISABELLE DE GAULMYN
Pas d’amélioration notable de la liberté religieuse.
La Turquie est-elle sur la voie de l’Europe en matière de liberté
religieuse ? Il sera bien difficile de donner une réponse positive ,
affirme la section Droits de l’homme de Missio, l’organisme allemand
des OEuvres pontificales missionnaires, dans un rapport publié en
septembre. Principal problème : l’absence de statut juridique des
communautés religieuses, le gouvernement semblant considérer leur
existence même comme incompatible avec le principe turc de laïcité.
Aussi, si la construction de lieux de culte est désormais libre, les
minorités non musulmanes ne peuvent rien demander puisque,
juridiquement, elles n’existent pas.
Par ailleurs, la formation supérieure étant monopole d’Etat, aucune
Eglise ne peut former son personnel à la théologie en Turquie, le
gouvernement cherchant à mettre cette formation sous contrôle (même
au séminaire orthodoxe de Halki, dans l’hypothèse de sa réouverture).
Quant aux clercs étrangers, leur entrée demeure très difficile. Même
les oeuvres caritatives sont considérablement freinées dans leur
action, alors que la Turquie s’est engagée à les préserver dans le
traité de Lausanne (1923) – qui protège les minorités non musulmanes
– et dans une loi de 1935, toujours pas appliquée. Enfin, selon le
rapport, les lois d’harmonisation européenne votées par la Turquie
n’ont pas apporté d’amélioration notable des problèmes existants . Il
y a parfois des miracles, même en politique, et la résolution des
problèmes fondamentaux en matière de liberté religieuse en Turquie en
constituerait indubitablement un , conclut le rapport.
N. S.

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 375033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 1) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 1) 52.48.46
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:
October 8, 2004
ACNIS Opinion Polls on Armenia’s Independence
Yerevan–The Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS)
today released the results of both a specialized questionnaire and a public
survey on “Armenia’s Thirteen-Year-Old Independence and Sovereignty,” which
it conducted in September among 50 experts and 1526 citizens from Yerevan
and all of Armenia’s regions.
ACNIS economic and diaspora affairs analyst Hovsep Khurshudian greeted the
invited guests and public participants with opening remarks. “Thirteen years
are probably not a long period to assess Armenia’s independence and
sovereignty, but it is important to look back to analyze, evaluate, and find
necessary mechanisms to surmount our shortcomings. Both the public and
expert surveys aim to achieve this goal,” he said.
ACNIS legal and political affairs analyst Stepan Safarian presented “The
Results of the Survey,” focusing in detail on the findings of the expert and
public opinion polls. Accordingly, a plurality of surveyed citizens and
specialists (43.8% and 34%, respectively) assert that the losses of the
independence era are more than its gains, while 8.8% and 26%, respectively,
say the gains are more than the losses. Hence, independence is valued more
among professional circles.
28.8% of citizens think that Armenia’s main achievement since its
independence is the establishment of the army and 18% the liberation of
Mountainous Karabagh. In contrast with the public survey, 46% of experts
choose liberation of Mountainous Karabagh as the key accomplishment of
Armenia, and only 16% the organization of a military. Among other
achievements of the independence years 8.9% of citizens mark strengthening
of ties with the Diaspora, 6.2% formation of people’s free thinking, 1.9%
shaping of national institutions, and 3.7% a return to national and
religious roots. In the expert opinion poll the corresponding findings are
4%, 4%, 10%, and 4%. According to 11.7% of citizens and 4% of experts,
Armenia has not registered any achievement since independence. 4.2% of
citizens and 6% of experts find this question difficult to answer.
Among the broader public, 38.4% point to poverty, emigration, unemployment
and other social evils as the main negative phenomenon since Armenia’s
independence, 10.2% check economic decline and turmoil, 14.7% formation of
clans, 9.4% decline in educational level, 3.6% deterioration of the health
care system, 6.1% isolation of the country, 10.3% human losses in Karabagh’s
fight for freedom, and 2.9% restriction of civil and political rights. In
the expert opinion poll the findings are 24%, 4%, 24%, 6%, 4%, 12%, 6%, and
12%, respectively. 45.6% of citizens and 50% of experts think that their
families’ standard of living has declined, 26.7% and 20% say it has remained
the same, and only 18.2% and 26% confirm it has improved.
The plurality of respondent citizens (33.7%) and experts (36%) opine that
all branches of national authority are equally anti-democratic. 13.9% of
citizens surveyed consider the presidency to be the most anti-democratic
institution, 9.6% the judiciary, and 9.2% the national assembly. The expert
indices read 36%, 26%, and 2%, respectively.
Most public respondents (31.2%) deem the terrorist act committed in the
Armenian parliament on October 27, 1999 as having the biggest negative
impact on the nation’s path of development, whereas the experts (42%) note
the falsification of presidential election results in 1996, 1998, and 2003.
4.8% of citizens and 14% of experts find falsification of the parliamentary
election results in 1995 and 2003 to be the most negative.
24.8% of citizens and 50% of experts mark the Armenian triumph in the
Karabagh war as carrying the biggest positive effect for the nation’s
development, 17.8% and 20% the cease-fire with Azerbaijan, 6.4% and 10%
adoption of the Armenian Constitution, 8.4% and 8% membership in the Council
of Europe, and 18.2% and 0%, respectively, the treaty of strategic
cooperation with Russia.
25.7% of citizens and an alarming 60% of experts are convinced that, if the
present system stays in place, Armenia will move toward authoritarianism;
14.6% and 20% think it will approach totalitarianism; and 17.8% and 8%,
respectively, forecast a tendency to democracy. Things are no better along
democracy’s timetable: 16.8% of citizens and 22% of experts believe that
Armenia will overcome the current obstacles and become a democratic country
in at least ten years, whereas 18.7% and 30% think it will take 25 years,
14.7% and 6% 50 years, and even 11.5% and 6% 100 years. More optimistic on
this score are the specialists, 20% of whom hope for the victory of
democracy within the next five years. Only 4.2% of citizens, on the other
hand, hold the same opinion. The most pessimistic group of experts (6%) and
citizens (20.1%) does not believe Armenia will ever become a democratic
country.
Only 13.6% of the public and 12% of experts conclude that Armenia is truly
independent and sovereign in its decisionmaking, while 70.4% and 80% do not.
Correspondingly 50.4% and 80% of them believe that the decisions made in
Armenia first and foremost depend on Russia, 8.8% and 8% on the United
States, and 14.8% and 4% on the European Union. 43% of citizens are of the
view that Armenia should maximally integrate with Russia, 10.3% with Europe,
and but 3.8% with the United States. The respective findings of the expert
opinion poll, quite distinctly, are 2%, 60%, and 8%.
The second item on the day’s agenda was a comment by former prime minister
Vazgen Manukian, chairman of the National Democratic Union, on “Independence
and Sovereignty: Reality or Ideal?” From his perspective, Armenia was
granted independence, the gravity and value of which were therefore
underestimated from the very beginning. Moreover, both the majority of
intellectuals and traditional parties were against independence, while the
government continues to pursue a policy contradicting the letter and spirit
of sovereignty. These measures do not promote the two basic blessings of
independence: perpetuation of the nation and extension of its international
influence. “Independence, the calling of which is to solve the problem of
national development, is not duly applied in our lives, and a mere change of
authority will not fix this situation,” he emphasized.
The formal presentations were followed by contributions by former minister
of state Vahan Shirkhanian; Stepan Minasian of the People’s Party of
Armenia; former parliamentarian Khoren Sargsian; Armine Gasparian of the
Institute of Culture and National Values; former state minister Hrach
Hakobian; Gagik Tadevosian of the National Unity Party; Artashes
Ghazakhetsian of the Armenia 2020 Project; Albert Baghdasarian of the
National Democratic Union; Yerevan State University professor Haik Sargsian;
former Yerevan mayor Vahagn Khachatrian; political analyst Artsrun Pepanian;
California Superior Court Judge Zaven Sinanian; American-Armenian attorney
Armen K. Hovannisian; and several others.
43.5% of the public respondents are male and 56.5% female. 13.7% are 16-20
years of age, 21.8% 21-30, 22.5% 31-40, 20.4% 41-50, 11.4% 51-60, 7% 61-70,
2.2% above 70, and 1% refused to answer. 43.5% of the citizens surveyed have
received a higher education, 12.1% incomplete higher, 18% specialized
secondary, 21.2% secondary, and 2.1% incomplete secondary training. 54.2%
are actively employed, 20.3% are unemployed, 6.9% are pensioners, 2.2%
welfare recipients, and 15.6% students. 59.7% are urban residents, and 40.3%
are from rural areas. 32.6% of them hail from Yerevan, the remainder from
the regions.
Among the experts, 72% are male and 28% female. 10% are 21-30 years of age,
32% 31-40, 34% 41-50, 18% 51-60, and 2% above 60. All of them have received
a higher education: 2% are full professors (PhD) and 30% candidates of
sciences, 66% hold a Master’s degree, and 2% have earned solely a
Bachelor’s degree. 20% are journalists by profession, 14% physicists or
radio-physicists, 10% political scientists, 8% economists, 8%
mathematicians, 8% managers, and 6% historians.
Founded in 1994 by Armenia’s first Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi K.
Hovannisian and supported by a global network of contributors, ACNIS serves
as a link between innovative scholarship and the public policy challenges
facing Armenia and the Armenian people in the post-Soviet world. It also
aspires to be a catalyst for creative, strategic thinking and a wider
understanding of the new global environment. In 2004, the Center focuses
primarily on public outreach, civic education, and applied research on
critical domestic and foreign policy issues for the state and the nation.
For further information on the Center or the full graphics of the poll
results, call (3741) 52-87-80 or 27-48-18; fax (3741) 52-48-46; e-mail
[email protected] or [email protected]; or visit or

EurasiaNet Organization
Oct 7 2004
ARMENIAN PILOTS TRAPPED IN AFRICAN MERCENARY PLOT
Emil Danielyan 10/07/04
Difficult economic times have forced many Armenians to search for
work abroad. For most, especially the large number of Armenians in
Russia, a foreign job means leading a relatively Spartan
lifestyle – the main aim being saving enough to send money back to
loved ones at home. For the six-man crew of a charter cargo jet,
however, what appeared at first to be a routine assignment has turned
into an ordeal in which they stand accused of participating in a
failed coup attempt in the African nation of Equatorial Guinea.
Ashot Karapetian and his five-man crew departed in their heavy
Antonov-12 transport jet from Yerevan’s international airport in
January. They, along with dozens of other Armenian aviators, had
taken on many jobs in the past shuttling cargo across Africa, and had
no reason to believe that their current assignment would be any
different than others.
They were mistaken.
The six Armenians found themselves under arrest last March, accused
of participating in an international plot to overthrow Equatorial
Guinea’s longtime president, Teodoro Obiang Nguema. Their trial in
Equatorial-Guinea’s capital, Malabo, began August 23. The trial had
been slated to resume October 4, but was postponed with no new
resumption date set. If convicted, the six Armenians face long prison
terms.
The aviators vigorously deny involvement in coup preparations. They
enjoy the strong support of the Armenian government, which insists
that they are innocent and which has lobbied hard to secure their
release. President Robert Kocharian has personally appealed to Obiang
to release the Armenian detainees.
Obiang, whose regime is seen by the United States as one of the most
repressive in the world, has been in power ever since overthrowing
his uncle and predecessor Macias Nguema in a 1979 coup. The
impoverished former Spanish colony began to attract Western interest
in the mid-1990s with the discovery of substantial hydrocarbon
reserves off its Atlantic coast.
According to British news accounts, a group of South African and
London-based businessmen, including the son of former British Prime
Minister Margaret Thatcher, sought to grab their share of the oil
riches by plotting to topple Obiang and install an exiled opposition
leader in his place.
The reported conspiracy was uncovered in early March. The arrests of
the Armenians and other foreigners in Malabo were announced a few
days later. The accused ringleader is Nick du Toit, an apartheid-era
soldier who ran a mercenary firm in South Africa until it was banned
in 1999.
Prosecutors in Malabo have not provided details on the Armenian
aircrew’s supposed role in the coup. Their Soviet-made Antonov-12
aircraft belonging to the Yerevan-based firm Tiga Air was chartered
to carry out flights across the region by Central Asian Logistics
(CAL), a German airfreight company.
CAL’s representative to Equatorial Guinea, Gerhard Eugen Merz, was
also among the foreign detainees. Merz died, officially of cerebral
malaria, in Malabo’s notorious Black Beach prison just days after his
arrest. The human rights group Amnesty International said he was
tortured to death.
The director of Tiga Air, Boris Avagian, insists that his company’s
contract with the Germans only envisaged the transportation of
“civilian goods and equipment.” He also claims to have never known or
dealt with the reputed South African mercenary du Toit.
“The charges against our pilots are groundless,” Avagian said in a
recent interview. “They are honest professionals who went to
Equatorial Guinea to do their job.”
CAL chief executive, Thomas Rinnerd, speaking in a telephone
interview, denied any connection between his Frankfurt-based company
and the alleged coup conspirators. “The Armenian pilots are 200
percent innocent. So are Mr. Merz and our company,” he said. He added
that the Armenian cargo jet had been hired by CAL to ship various
supplies to oil companies operating in the African country
Officials in Malabo announced in early September that a team of
investigators would travel to Armenia to probe possible links between
the Armenian transport firm and the alleged coup plotters. Armenian
authorities have maintained that they have no information about such
a mission. But, a person close to the arrested aviators’ families
claims that a visit did take place, and that the Guineans told the
relatives not to talk to journalists.
The pilots, for their part, have testified at the trial that they
carried out only one flight from Equatorial Guinea, bound for the
Democratic Republic of Congo. They said the Congolese airport they
were bound for was closed and they returned to Malabo with nothing in
the hold.
Du Toit’s court testimony did not explicitly implicate the Armenians
in the coup preparations, a fact that the Armenian government says
proves their innocence. “These are quite serious ground for
optimism,” Sergei Manaserian, Armenia’s ambassador to Egypt who has
repeatedly visited Malabo since March, told the official Armenpress
news agency on September 7.
The saga of the Antonov-12 crew is somewhat symbolic of the overall
state of Armenia’s civil aviation sector. During the Soviet era, the
small South Caucasus republic operated 13 airports and a possessed a
fleet of commercial aircraft that employed more than a thousand
pilots and technicians. Today, 0nly Yerevan’s Zvartnots international
airport now functions at full capacity.
The post-Soviet economic decline coupled with government corruption
and mismanagement is taking a heavy toll on the sector. Last year’s
scandalous bankruptcy of Armenian Airlines, the state-run carrier
flagship, left more than 300 pilots and flight engineers out of work.
The luckiest few of them found new jobs with local small companies
like Tiga Air that carry out charter flights in Asia and Africa.
The Armenian aircrews are cheap labor for the foreign firms that pay
them a fraction of what they would spend on Western pilots. Aviation
experts say they also run additional health and safety risks in third
world countries. Two Armenian planes have already crashed in Iran and
Sudan under mysterious circumstances.
Editor’s Note: Emil Danielyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

AZERI MPS URGE INTERNATIONAL REACTION TO ARMENIAN RESETTLEMENT IN KARABAKH
ANS TV, Baku
2 Oct 04
The Milli Maclis (parliament) standing commission for foreign
relations has appealed to the OSCE, UN, NATO, the Organization of the
Islamic Conference and the League of Arab States in connection with
the illegal settlement of Armenians in the occupied territory of
Nagornyy Karabakh and other seven districts of Azerbaijan.
In an interview with Trend news agency, the commission chairman, Samad
Seyidov, said that these steps, which are aimed at strengthening the
occupying regime in the occupied territories, cause concern. This runs
counter to the Geneva convention which bans an occupying country from
settling people in the occupied territories. These steps by Armenia
call into question a peaceful solution to the Karabakh conflict,
Seyidov said.
The standing commission called on the world community to react to the
incident properly.

Border control in North Caucasus not aimed against Armenia
YEREVAN, October 1 (Itar-Tass) – Border control imposed on the Russian
border in the North Caucasus is not aimed against transit of cargoes
to and out of Armenia, Chairman of the Federation Council Sergei
Mironov declared on Friday.
Mironov arrived in Yerevan on an official visit as the head of a
delegation of the upper chamber of the Russian parliament.
Mironov expressed the hope that the Armenian leadership and the people
will express understanding of the causes that forced Russia to
terminate transit of cargoes across Russia’s state border in the North
Caucasus. Many terrorists who feel at ease in Georgia go straight to
our territory, Mironov said. After the tragedy in Beslan we had to
take definite measures, he added.
Russia and Armenia are among the countries, which occupy top positions
in the struggle against terrorism, Mironov said. The coming discussion
with the Armenian leadership will be another contribution to the
common wall that should rebuff terrorism all over the world, Mironov
stressed.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress