BAKU: Oskanyan: "OSCE MG wishes to achieve at least oral agreement"

Today, Azerbaijan
Dec 26 2007

Vardan Oskanyan: "Minsk group of OSCE wishes to achieve at least an
oral agreement on the Garabagh conflict because personae may change
in the negotiation process"

26 December 2007 [13:29] – Today.Az

One of the reasons that the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group wish
to achieve at least an oral agreement on the document, discussed
during the talks is that the personae may change in the negotiation
process.

The statement was made by the Foreign Minister of Armenia Vardan
Oskanyan.

He said the next president will have a right not to accept the
document and the co-chairman strive to create obstacles for new
persons to decline it.

"Another possibility is that the co-chairmen may also change and
there are some signs of it. Thus, everyone would benefit from the
certain recognition of the document and from existence of any basis
for continuation of talks", V.Oskanyan said.

He considers it necessary to ensure the continuation of the current
process.

"I am confident that it will come to life, as a good foundation has
been laid. From the diplomatic point of view, our positions are quite
strong and it is necessary to continue the settlement process on this
basis. If we leave what has been achieved and try to start from the
beginning, we will give new opportunities to Azerbaijan", V.Oskanyan
noted.

He said it is inadmissible.

"International community will not allow this, as much efforts have
been put and talks on the said document have been conducted for
already two years", the Armenian Foreign Minister said.

He noted that Armenia had never achieved such a progress in talks, as
Azerbaijan refused to speak on the political status of Nagorno
Garabagh, considering the return of territories and problems of
refugees the main issue.

"The ice broke up in this sense. Today the political status of
Nagorno Garabagh is a key issue, the rest are bound to it. Thus, it
is a fair basis for continuation of the process and if we deviate
from it, it will do harm to the negotiation process.

The co-chairmen and international circles are well aware of it",
Armenian Foreign Minister noted.

/Day.Az/

URL:

http://www.today.az/news/politics/42043.html

Armenia reserves right to accept/reject Azerbaijan invite to TRACECA

Armenia reserves a right to accept or reject Azerbaijan’s proposal to
participate in TRACECA Summit in Baku

2007-12-27 18:04:00

ArmInfo. Armenia reserves a right to accept or reject Azerbaijan’s
proposal to participate in TRACECA Summit in Baku

A source in the Armenian Government told ArmInfo that at the 6th annual
session of TRACECA Intergovernmental Commission in Astana December
12-13 like at the previous session in Sofia in 2006, the Azerbaijani
delegation again proposed hosting TRACECA Summit of 2008. The Armenian
delegation make a statement on this occasion and proposed making a
reservation in the final text of the resolution. Thus, Armenia declares
that it is not against Baku hosting the Summit, however it stresses
with reservation that holding the Summit in Brussels would become an
additional impetus for long-term general development of TRACECA
corridor. Moreover, it would boost the cooperation of the European
Union and TRACECA. The Republic of Armenia reserves a right to make
additions to this provision or leave it unapplied any moment informing
the other parties in the written form about changes or non-application
of the given provision. The source reports that the given reservation
allows Armenia to accept or reject Azerbaijan’s proposal to participate
in the TRACECA Summit in Baku.

Ex-Ambassador Lutem responds to hearings in RA National Assembly

AZG Armenian Daily #241, 28/12/2007

Armenia-Turkey

EX-AMBASSADOR LUTEM RESPONDS TO HEARINGS IN RA
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

December 19-20 the Parliamentary Commission for
Foreign Relations held hearings on the challenges and
perspectives of Armenia-Turkey relations. The speeches
of the head of the Commission Armen Rustamian, RA
National Assembly Speaker Tigran Torosian,
Vice-Speaker Vahan Hovhannisian and EU Special
Representative Peter Semneby confirmed the importance
of such discussion.

The Armenian Studies Institute of the Eurasian
Strategic Research Center, Ankara, did not remain
indifferent towards the discussion at the Armenian
Parliament. The relevant article of Ex-Ambassador Omer
Engin Lutem, head of the Armenian Studies Institute,
was published in the daily bulleting of the institute
on December 24. Lutem’s article is rather remarkable
not only in sense of explanation of Tukey’s approach
to the matter, but also explanations of Turkey’s
refusal to take part in the hearings at the Armenian
Parliament.

Below is represented the translation of Lutem’s
article.

"The Chairman of the Standing Committee on Foreign
Relations of the National Assembly of the Republic of
Armenia, Armen Rustamian, sent me an invitation via
e-mail to attend the parliamentary hearings organized
under the heading "Armenian-Turkish Relations:
Problems and Perspectives" held on 19-20 December.
Although they do not engender immediate results, such
hearings are essentially useful as they are conducive
to aiding the parties involved gauge each other’s
viewpoints. For this reason, I would have liked to
have been able to take part in the said discussions.
Unfortunately, I had to inform Rustamian that I would
not be able to attend due to prior engagements.

As gathered from the press, 20 or so Turks were
invited to attend the hearings. Among them were
personalities such as Taner Akcam, Fatma Muge Gokcek
and Halil Berktay who fully espouse and have taken it
upon themselves to win others over to Armenian views;
people such as Orhan Pamuk and Baskin Oran who adhere
to views that fall fairly in line with the Armenian
stance; and individuals such as Can Paker who approach
the subject matter from the perspective of the
European Union. Apart from myself, in order to voice
the "Turkish standpoint", Turkish Historical Society
President Yusuf Halacoglu, and International Strategic
Research Institute Director Sedat Laciner were invited
to attend. Most likely Patriarch Mutafian was called
upon to participate in order to represent Turkey’s
Armenian community. As these hearings were organized
by the National Assembly of Armenia, it would only
have been appropriate if members of the Turkish Grand
National Assembly were invited to attend as well.
However, on this point, nothing surfaced in the press.

All Turks invited notified how they would not be able
to attend the hearings. No doubt this is a result of
the hearings corresponding with a religious holiday
and a result of the invitations having been made so
late, and hence due to those in question having prior
engagements. Without touching upon this organizational
flaw, Armen Rustamian alleged that those invited did
not participate because the Turkish government was
opposed to the hearings. No doubt, the person in
question does not know Turkey very well. In present
day Turkey, there is no official authority, which can
or would make such a demand, let alone a suggestion to
this end. No official spoke to me about these
parliamentary hearings and I am sure this follows suit
for those others who were invited from Turkey. If this
were the case, this surely would be covered by the
press.

Consequently, in the absence of the invited Turks,
save for Peter Semneby, special representative of the
EU for South Caucasus, it appears that only Armenians
(including Foregin Minister Oskanian) spoke during the
hearings. Apart from a few strong criticisms, it seems
that nothing new was voiced.

As cited above, the importance of such hearings rests
in generating greater understanding concerning the
views and standpoints of the parties concerned. Looked
at from this perspective, it would be worthwhile if
the Turkish Grand National Assembly’s concerned
commissions were to organize a similar meeting in the
coming months."

LTP: Power Structures intimidate and threaten his supporters

ACCORDING TO LEVON TER-PETROSIAN, POWER STRUCTURES INTIMIDATE AND
THREATEN HIS SUPPORTERS TO MAKE THEM CEASE SUPPORTING HIM

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 25, NOYAN TAPAN. On December 25, the office of civil
initiatives of Levon Ter-Petrosian’s nomination spread the first RA
President’s appeal to citizens. The appeal, in particular, read:

"It is over one month that my supporters are orally or by telephone
invited to police stations and security service departments throughout
the country and are subjected to phychological pressure, intimidations
and threats to make them cease supporting me and taking part in rallies
organized by me.

In addition to the fact that with these actions law enforcement bodies
are already violating the electoral law, they also contain an element
of violation of electoral legislation. All illegal actions of the kind
registered so far sooner or later will become a subject of a special
investigation and those responsible will be brought to court.

No policeman, no security service employee has the right to invite
citizens to the respective departments orally or by telephone. The only
legal way of it is a written notification.

Therefore, addressing to all of you, I call you for recognizing your
rights, not giving way to self-will of the authorities, not responding
to illegal calls of law enforcement bodies until they send written
notifications to you. And in case of receiving notifications copy them
and send the copies to our movement’s offices."

Pelosi’s First Year As House Speaker Marked By Little Change On War

PELOSI’S FIRST YEAR AS HOUSE SPEAKER MARKED BY LITTLE CHANGE ON WAR
Zachary Coile

San Francisco Chronicle
Dec 23 2007
USA

The last day of the House’s 2007 session last week summed up the
turbulence of Nancy Pelosi’s history-making first year as House
speaker.

In the morning, she beamed a wide smile as she stood beside President
Bush while he signed an energy bill with the first major increase in
fuel economy standards in 30 years.

But by Wednesday afternoon, her party was facing two of its biggest
defeats. To keep the alternative minimum tax from hitting 20 million
Americans next year, Democrats had to abandon their pledge not to
pass any legislation that increased the deficit.

Then Pelosi, whose party took control of Congress pledging to change
course in Iraq, watched the House approve $70 billion in war funding,
part of a budget deal that avoided a government shutdown. Members of
her own party denounced it as a capitulation to the White House.

"The war in Iraq is the biggest disappointment for us, the inability
to stop the war," Pelosi told reporters in a group interview in her
ceremonial office just hours before the war vote. She quickly pegged
the blame on congressional Republicans.

The Democrats’ failure to shift the war’s direction, their No. 1
priority for the year, has eclipsed many of the party’s successes on
other issues, including raising the minimum wage for the first time
in a decade and passing the strongest ethics and lobbying reforms
since Watergate.

And Bush, despite his lame-duck status, outflanked Democrats in
the end-of-year budget fight – forcing them to accept his number,
$555 billion in domestic spending, and funding for Iraq – simply by
refusing to yield.

Asked about the setbacks last week, Pelosi, as she has all year,
flashed her most optimistic smile and refused to be drawn into the
criticism.

"Almost everything we’ve done has been historic," she said.

But if Pelosi is smiling, so are Republicans. They began the year
defeated and demoralized. But they have since shown surprising unity,
backing the president on the war and finding new purpose in blocking
Democrats’ spending initiatives.

"We’ve stood up to them every step of the way," House Minority Leader
John Boehner, R-Ohio, said last week.

The tense mood among Democrats in the session’s final weeks was a
marked contrast from the festive first weeks of the new Congress, when
Pelosi was sworn in as the nation’s first female speaker, surrounded
by children on the House floor. She promised to lead Congress in a
new direction.

Democrats took off on a legislative sprint in which they quickly
approved their "Six for ’06" agenda including raising the minimum
wage, cutting interest rates on student loans, backing federally
funded embryonic stem cell research, and revoking tax breaks for
oil companies.

But the bills bogged down in the Senate, where the Democrats’ 51-49
majority is so thin it allowed Republicans to determine what would be
passed. Democrats have struggled to get the 60 votes needed to overcome
filibusters, which are now an almost daily experience in the Senate.

"Pelosi suffered the same ailment that (former Republican House
Speaker) Newt Gingrich suffered from when he became speaker:
Senate-itis," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the
American Enterprise Institute. "A lot of what the House accomplished
this year either sat in the Senate or got eviscerated by the Senate.

What you are left with is not nearly as robust as what you started
with."

Even the energy bill, the Democrats’ crowning achievement, was
stripped of a broad tax package and a renewable electricity standard
that would have pushed the nation toward wind and solar power. Still,
the fuel economy piece alone is expected to save 2.3 million barrels
of oil a day by 2020 – more than the United States currently imports
from the Persian Gulf.

Pelosi had to make some painful trade-offs. To get the minimum
wage hike signed, Democrats had to attach it to a $120 billion war
spending bill.

Other elements of her agenda fell victim to Bush’s veto pen. Congress
twice passed a bill with bipartisan support to expand the state
children’s health insurance program to cover 4 million more children.

Bush twice vetoed it, forcing Democrats to settle for an 18-month
extension of the current program.

Pelosi and her Senate counterpart, Majority Leader Harry Reid,
D-Nev., held countless votes on war measures setting timetables
for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and other restrictions on Bush’s
policy. But their strategy counted on Republicans switching sides –
and very few did.

"I didn’t foresee that," Pelosi acknowledged. "We thought they would
reflect the wishes and views of their constituents."

Some critics called the assumption naive. Anti-war groups have urged
her to use Congress’ power of the purse to simply cut off funds for
the war, but Pelosi opposes the move, which many Democrats fear would
be seen as undermining the troops. Instead the party has pushed for
a "responsible redeployment" – meaning funding the war, but with
strings attached.

In October, Pelosi’s ally and the House’s top appropriator, David Obey,
D-Wis., said Democrats would draw a line in the sand: They would refuse
to pass any more war funding without a timeline for withdrawal. But
by last week, with the budget impasse threatening to shut down the
government, Democrats dropped the strategy.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, a founding member of the Out of Iraq
Caucus, said the Democrats’ mistake was not to force the threat to
deny funds earlier in the year.

"I wish she could have been bolder," Woolsey said, while acknowledging
that Pelosi had to mediate between competing views in the caucus. "If
we had started that earlier, we could have built on it until it
reached a crescendo, because it’s what the American people want."

The Democrats were left in a weak bargaining position at the end of
the year. They needed to pass 11 spending bills, but Republicans and
Bush demanded the $70 billion for the war in return. The president also
held firm on his spending limits. If the impasse led to a government
shutdown, Pelosi knew her party would receive much of the blame. So
she agreed to the deal, with the concession that Democrats were able
to preserve money for their priorities, including home heating aid
for the poor and health care for veterans.

"We made it very clear months ago we were not going to shut down the
government," said Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, one of Pelosi’s top
lieutenants. "Tragically, that put the president in the driver’s seat."

Miller said the fight over the war has obscured the progress Democrats
made on other fronts, including cutting interest rates on loans for
college students and passing a huge increase in veterans’ benefits. He
said Pelosi worked tirelessly to get the energy bill over the finish
line.

"At the beginning of the year, people said we had no chance of getting
an energy bill," Miller said. "This was a tour de force for her."

Pelosi also showed she was willing to buck some of her party’s most
powerful members to get her way. She went head-to-head with Rep. John
Dingell, D-Mich., Detroit automakers’ top ally, over raising fuel
economy standards – and won. She pushed through an ethics reform bill
that her friend Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., called "total crap."

"Some of her colleagues when they took back Congress said, ‘That
reform message worked to get us elected, but now it’s our turn.’ "
Ornstein said. "That has not been her attitude and her approach,
and I give her credit for that."

Pelosi had clumsy moments, too. She pushed hard for a resolution
denouncing Turkey’s mass killings of Armenians during World War I as
genocide, only to reverse course when it sparked a diplomatic fight,
with Turkey threatening to reduce logistical support to U.S. troops
in Iraq.

Republicans say she has reneged on a promise to run a more open
House. Following a pattern set by the GOP when it ran the House for 12
years, Democrats have often rammed bills through, giving Republicans
few opportunities to amend them.

"It’s hard to work together when you’re not even invited into the
room," said Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas.

But Pelosi’s supporters say Republicans haven’t been willing to
compromise and have mostly tried to block Democrats from racking
up accomplishments.

"The Republicans have frustrated us because they want to run a
negative campaign saying the Democrats didn’t accomplish anything,"
said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles.

The bickering in Congress, over the war and other issues, has taken
a toll. When Democrats took power, Congress had an approval rating
of 35 percent, but it’s since dipped into the low 20s, according to
the Gallup poll.

Pelosi is already crafting a strategy for next year, when the
presidential race is likely to take some of the spotlight off
Congress. With the war debate at an impasse, she’s planning to push
a series of measures on health care, the economy, the mortgage crisis
and global warming.

If Democrats can’t win on these issues, at the very least they can draw
sharp distinctions with Republicans leading up to the fall elections,
she said.

"One of the reasons we were able to be successful with the energy
bill is that this is something we took to the American people," she
said. "That is what we have to do next. We have to go public with
many of these issues."

News from the presidential campaign. A18

Pelosi’s first year San Francisco Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi made
history as the nation’s first female House speaker in January, but
she’s had a bumpy first year marked by successes and failures.

Biggest successes — Passed an energy bill raising fuel economy
standards for the first time in 30 years, the equivalent today of
taking 28 million cars off the road by 2020.

— Approved a major cut in interest rates on student loans to make
college more affordable.

— Passed the strongest ethics reforms since Watergate, banning gifts
from lobbyists and making earmarks more transparent.

— Secured the largest increase in veterans’ benefits in history.

— Increased the minimum wage for the first time in a decade, from
$5.15 an hour to $7.25 over three years.

Biggest failures — Despite repeated votes, failed to enact any major
changes in Iraq war policy.

— Tried to expand the state children’s health insurance program to
cover 4 million more children, but was blocked by President Bush and
House Republicans.

— Sparked a diplomatic fight with Turkey by pushing a resolution
condemning the country’s mass killing of Armenians during World War I.

— Abandoned the party’s "pay-as-you-go" budget rules to avoid letting
the alternative minimum tax hit 20 million Americans.

— Accepted Bush’s spending limits in the end-of-the-year budget
fight to avoid shutting down the federal government.

The State Of Media Freedom In Armenia According To OSCE

THE STATE OF MEDIA FREEDOM IN ARMENIA ACCORDING TO OSCE

AZG Armenian Daily
22/12/2007

OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)
published Needs Assessment Mission Report ahead of the 19 February
2008 Presidential Election in Armenia. The report also involves the
state of media freedom in Armenia.

According to it, there are about 60 television channels and about 20
radio companies, as well as more than 100 print media publications
(including two state-funded newspapers) in Armenia. However, television
is the most important and influential source of information. The
public service broadcaster H1 is regarded as the most influential
media outlet in Armenia and reaches the whole country. Some other
private channels cover large parts of the country.

Print media has a limited circulation outside Yerevan.

Despite the relatively high number of media outlets in Armenia,
a lack of diversity in viewpoints presented by broadcast media has
been criticized by international organizations dealing with freedom
of expression, including the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the
Media. Factors affecting the media situation include a high level of
influence over editorial lines by political and business interests,
financial weakness of media outlets because of low advertising
profitability, and legal actions taken against journalists in recent
years.

By law, all broadcast media have to provide equal airtime to
contestants during the official campaign period. Recent amendments
to the Law on Television and Radio

Broadcasting extended this obligation to the period before the start of
the election campaign. The amendments also included the obligation to
provide impartial and nonjudgmental information about the pre-election
campaigns of candidates in their information programmes. Campaign
broadcasts on TV and radio have now to be explicitly identified
as such.

The amended law has also clarified the role of the National

Commission for Television and Radio (NCTR), which monitors the
broadcast media’s compliance with legal procedures. The NCTR is now
entitled to file a court case against TV or radio companies that
violate legal provisions.

The CEC is obliged to ensure equal access for contestants by random
selection of broadcast slots and order of appearance for both free
and paid airtime.

The relevant lottery will be held on 22 January 2008.

Each presidential candidate is entitled to use up to 60 minutes
of free airtime on public television and up to 120 minutes of free
airtime on public radio. In addition, each candidate may use paid
airtime on public television and public radio: up to 120 minutes and
up to 180 minutes respectively. Rates for political advertisements
must be publicly announced, consistently offered to all contestants
and may not be changed during the election period. Rates were set in
November 2007 and range from 100,000 AMD (approx EUR 210) to 130,000
AMD (approx EUR 280), as in the May 2007 parliamentary elections.

Some OSCE/ODIHR NAM interlocutors expressed concerns about access
to the media before the official start of the campaign on 21
January 2008. Some alleged that obstacles exist for certain
opposition representatives to gain access to media and that
an unofficial blockade against their presence on the media,
especially on the public broadcaster H1, is being enforced. The
example of Gyumri-based TV station Gala was cited which has come
under scrutiny from tax authorities, allegedly because it screened
a speech by Levon Ter-Petrossian at the end of September in which he
announced his intention to run in the presidential election. However,
the Chairman of the NCTR as well as the Executive Director of H1
dispute these allegations and explicitly stated their aim to provide
equitable access to candidates, particularly once it is known who the
nominated candidates are. Especially H1 vows to fulfill its role as
public broadcaster and to thoroughly cover the presidential election
including possible debates between candidates and a focus on tabulation
and transmission of results on Election Day.

A local non-governmental organization, the Yerevan Press Club, is
conducting media monitoring of the broadcasts of seven television
channels, including H1, and the public radio from 1 October until 15
December, and also plans to monitor the official campaign period. The
Office of the Press Secretary of the President is conducting monitoring
of the political broadcasts of six private television channels.

OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights is going to
send to Armenia 24 log-time and 250 short-time observers.

210 Families Got New Apartments

210 FAMILIES GOT NEW APARTMENTS

Lragir
Dec 21 2007
Armenia

On December 21 the residents of four buildings under demolition had
a housewarming party on the eve of the holidays. In 2007 four blocks
of apartments were built for the residents of houses under demolition
in Yerevan, 210 apartments in total. All the apartments are decorated
and have central heating.

Since 2005 over 400 apartments have been built for residents of blocks
to be demolished, on which over 4 billion dollars was spent.

During the ceremony in which the mayor of Yerevan and the prime
minister participated, Mayor Zakharyan said the program will continue
in 2008 and later until all the residents of buildings under demolition
get apartments.

"The Verdict Denigrates Armenia"

"THE VERDICT DENIGRATES ARMENIA"

A1+
[05:11 pm] 21 December, 2007

The RA Cassation Court will hear the case of the "Royal Armenia"
Company in 2008. "Time is not pressing. We needn’t hurry," Attorney
Ashot Sargsian told A1+.

The latter is presently studying the "disgraceful verdict" brought
in by the Appellate Court on Marshal and Criminal Issues.

"The verdict denigrates Armenia. I have never come across such infamous
verdicts throughout my practice.

The judge, Suren Ghazarian, has brought in an adverse verdict which
defames Armenia," Ashot Sargsian says.

Reminder, the "FIG" Company charged Royal Armenia’s leading shareholder
Gagik Hakobian and executive director Aram Ghazarian with smuggling,
tax evasion and document forgery. FIG is a caterer of the "Royal
Armenia" coffee company.

Gagik Hakobian was sentenced to 6 years’ and Aram Ghazarian to 2
years’ imprisonment.

According to Ashot Sargsian the judge’s verdict is unwarranted.

"They have merely retyped the verdict of the First Instance Court
of Kentron and Nork-Marash communes. I am not exaggerating," Ashot
Sargsian says.

The most striking is that they fully reprinted the material submitted
by the preinvestigation body. The reprint is but a failure," Sargsian
states.

Ashot Sargsian does not count on the Appellate Court’s impartiality. He
is going to quash the verdict in the European Court.

Akif Nagi Demands Bringing To Justice Participants In ‘Azerbaijan’S

AKIF NAGI DEMANDS BRINGING TO JUSTICE PARTICIPANTS IN ‘AZERBAIJAN’S WEEK IN YEREVAN’

2007-12-20 10:45:00

ArmInfo-TURAN: Chairman of the Karabakh Liberation Movement (KLM) Akif
Nagi called on General Prosecutor to bring to criminal responsibility
the representatives of Azerbaijani civil society who participated in
Azerbaijan’s Week in Yerevan action.

In his appeal Nagi wrote that Azerbaijan was represented in that event
by the head of Ganja department of the Helsinki Civil Assembly Sahib
Babayev, human rights defender Khamis Masimov, publicist Seymur Bayjan,
the editor of the edition "Third sight" Rauf Rajabov, the head of
"Solidarity" NGO Afat Sariyeva and the lawyer Javanshir Omarov.

"In his speech in Armenia S.Babayev said that 80% of Azerbaijan’s
population are against the war against Armenia. We think that such
statements run counter the position of Azerbaijan’s President and
negatively affect the fighting spirit of Azerbaijan’s army. These
people violate Azerbaijan’s legislation, and I ask you to bring them
to justice in accordance with Article 274 of the Criminal Code",
Akif Nagi says.

EU Interested In Normalization Of Armenian-Turkish Relations

EU INTERESTED IN NORMALIZATION OF ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS

PanARMENIAN.Net
19.12.2007 18:33 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ December 19, RA National Assembly Speaker Tigran
Torosian met with EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus
Peter Semneby, who arrived in Armenia to attend the extended
parliamentary, the RA NA press office said.

The Speaker described the diplomat’s visit as manifestation of EU’s
attention to regional problems.

He gave a high estimation to the role of the European Union in the
region and emphasized that Armenia adheres to EU principles and values.

For his part, Mr Semneby stressed the importance of discussing the
Armenian-Turkish problem in the context of European integration. "Both
Yerevan and Ankara should define and accept the principles the
Armenian-Turkish relations will base on," he said.

"Dialogue is a basis for overcoming difficulties.

Armenia’s position meets these principles. We concede that there
are problems which should be omitted for a while. As for Turkey, it
turns Armenia’s problems with a third country, Azerbaijan, over to
the Armenian-Turkish relations. It can overcome the complex evoked by
the Armenian Genocide and keeps the border closed, thus conflicting
with European values."

"Still in autumn 2003 we proposed the head of the Turkish delegation
to PACE to meet and establish a kind of relations but no response
has come so far," he noted.

Touching upon recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the Speaker said
that Turkey’s proposal to form a joint commission of historians is
unacceptable, since Armenia doesn’t question the fact of Genocide.