Author: Kajoyan Gevork

KAZAKHSTAN AMBASSADOR TO ARMENIA: ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF CUSTOMS UNION REACHES $2 TRLN

YEREVAN, January 29. /ARKA/. Economic potential of the Customs Union
reaches 2 trillion dollars, ambassador of Kazakhstan to Armenia Aimdos
Bozzhigitov said Saturday.

Over 9 months of 2012, trade turnover in the countries of the Customs
Union grew by 40 billion dollars

“Today the Customs Union is a huge market with population of 170
million and economy potential of 2 trillion dollars”, Bozzhigitov said
at a conference on Armenia’s Eurasian integration and its prospects
held by “Integration and Development” analytical NGO in Yerevan.

Bozzhigitov pointed out that “there has been experience of
counteraction and global integration structures are created not for
the first time”.

“Globalization unites people into one information and communication
space, with no boundaries, with free flow of goods, capital and human
resources. In the same time, globalization brings vulnerability and
fragility into the modern world: terrorism, drug trafficking and
extremism have no boundaries either and are global challenges for
the humanity. Uneven social and economic development of the world
is intensified resulting in tougher international competition”,
the ambassador said.

Yet, globalization carries huge opportunities if a correct development
path is picked up to ensure competitiveness, according to Bozzhigitov.

Bozzhigitov also reminded that Kazakhstan president Nursultan Nazarbaev
was the first to voice the idea of Eurasian integration in 1994. -0-

ARMENIA’S RESPONSE TO AZERI XENOPHOBIA INADEQUATE – DEBATE

TERT.AM
29.01.13

The Congress of Armenian Refugees from Azerbaijan held on Tuesday
a round table to discuss Azerbaijan’s Armenophobic policies and
Armenia’s failure to provide an adequate response.

The debate entitled “The Safarov Country: The Western Caspian Nations
and the World” had brought together representatives of political
organizations and NGOs, who expressed concerns of the Azerbaijan’s
large-scale Armenophobia and Armenia’s failure to react adequately.

Armine Aghabekyan, a member of the Xenophobia Prevention Initiative,
said in her speech that such policies do not signal positive
developments for future. “We are unable to prevent the Armenophobic
propaganda today, so the future holds nothing good in store for us,”
she noted.

As a possible solution, Aghabekyan proposed seeking Iran’s help. “We
can ask Iran for help, seeking its influence – at least through NGOs,
if not on the government level – on Azerbaijan as an Islamic country.

They must not be in the dark about these issues, given especially that
Azerbaijan often solves such problems on behalf of Iran,” she said.

Larisa Alaverdyan, a former ombudsman who now heads a human rights
NGO, stressed the importance of reaching a solution based on Armenia’s
positions. She referred to a recent statement calling for measures to
term the 1988-1994 Armenian massacres in Azerbaijani cities and towns
(Baku, Sumgait etc), and Nagorno-Karabakh crimes of genocide.

“Genocide was for many years linked to 1915 and the Western Armenia.

But that also happened in Baku and Shushi,” she said, noting that
the National Assembly had earlier rejected the bill, excluding it
from its big agenda.

Alaverdyan said it is important for the parliament to treat the issue
as the continuation of Genocide. “I don’t speak of demanding a world
recognition. But we could have achieved what we wanted to by exposing
the problem literately,” she added.

Alaverdyan thinks the Armenian authorities are lagging behind, relying
mostly on NGO efforts. “I strongly doubt that we will manage to turn to
the European Court, so the United Nations is the only option left. One
cannot act on an NGO level while having a government,” she said.

LA PRODUCTION DE FEUILLE D’ALUMINIUM D’ARMENAL EN HAUSSE DE 4,9 %
Stephane

armenews.com
mardi 29 janvier 2013

La societe Armenal a produit 19543 tonnes de feuilles d’aluminium
entre janvier et septembre 2012 ce qui correspond a une augmentation
de 4,9 % compare a 2011.

Armenal a ete fondee en mai 2000. C’est le seul producteur de feuille
d’aluminium au Caucase et dans les regions d’Asie Centrale.

Selon le service des douanes, les exportations de feuille d’aluminium
ont ete de 19113 tonnes au cours des 9 premiers mois de 2012 en
augmentation de 7,2 % comapre a 2011. La part d’Armenal dans les
exportations armeniennes est de 5,7 %.

Les produits d’Armenal constituent 87 % de toutes les exportations
armeniennes vers les Etats-Unis.

mardi 29 janvier 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

L’AEROPORT DE STEPANAKERT AU MENU DES DISCUSSIONS ENTRE AZERIS ET ARMENIENS A PARIS SOUS L’EGIDE DU GROUPE DE MINSK
Gari

armenews.com
mardi 29 janvier 2013

Cedant aux pressions de la communaute internationale qui avait appele
Armeniens et Azeris a regler la question de la reouverture controversee
de l’aeroport de Stepanakert par la voie diplomatique, les ministres
des affaires etrangères de l’Armenie et de l’Azerbaïdjan se sont
rencontres le lundi 28 janvier a Paris pour entamer des negociations
a ce sujet sous l’egide des mediateurs internationaux du Groupe de
Minsk de l’OSCE.

Dans une declaration commune, les copresidents americain, russe et
francais du Groupe de Minsk indiquent que “les questions relatives
aux vols civils vers et depuis l’aeroport du Haut-Karabagh” etaient
a l’ordre d’un jour des entretiens visant a sortir de l’impasse le
processus de paix du Karabagh “.

La declaration ne donne pas plus de precisions quant a la teneur
des discussions ni sur l’eventualite d’un quelconque accord sur la
question entre les ministres armenien Edouard Nalbandian et azeri
Elmar Mammadyarov.

L’agence de presse azeri Trend, citant un porte-parole du ministère
azeri des affaires etrangères, rapport qye M. Mammadyarov avait reitere
la position officielle de Bakou selon laquelle toute liaison aerienne
entre l’Armenie et le Karabagh serait tenue pour illegale tant que
se poursuivra “l’occupation des territoires azerbaïdjanais”.

Le ministère armenien des affaires etrangères a pour sa part tarde
a communiquer sur la rencontre.

Au debut du mois, l’Azerbaïdjan avait officiellement autorise sa
force aerienne a abattre tout appareil survolant le Karabagh sans la
permission de Bakou s’il n’existait pas “d’informations precises sur
la presence de passagers civils a son bord”. Les avions de combat
azerbaïdjanais auront l’autorisation de forcer tout appareil a se
poser dans un aeroport de l’Azerbaïdjan au cas où des informations
auront ete communiquees aux autorites de Bakou selon lesquelles cet
appareil transporte des passagers civils, en vertu de la decision
annoncee par le gouvernement azeri.

La partie armenienne avait repondu aux menaces de l’Azerbaïdjan par
la voix de son ministre de la defense Seyran Ohanian qui a assure
que ses forces “garantiront la securite des avions que doit affrreter
l’aviation civile”.

Un porte-parole des autorites du Karabagh, a indique pour sa part que
toute attaque contre un avion armenien serait consideree comme un
acte de guerre. La communaute internationale a exprime a plusieurs
reprises sa preoccupation concernant ce nouveau motif de differend
entre Armeniens et Azeris, pressant les parties en conflit de chercher
une ” solution diplomatique”. Les copresidents du Groupe de Minsk
ont indique le 28 janvier qu’ils avaient rappele a MM. Nalbandian et
Mammadyarov la teneur de leur precedente declaration a ce sujet. Les
mediateurs avaient declare en juillet 2012 qu’ils avaient “recu les
assurances renouvelees de chacune des parties qu’il n’y aurait pas
recours a la force ou a la menace de la force contre des appareils
civils, que la question serait reglee par la voie diplomatique et
qu’elle ne serait pas politisee”.

Dans sa dernière declaration, la troika a indique que les entretiens
de Paris avaient egalement porte sur une ” proposition de travail en
vue de faire progresser le processus de paix”, telle qu’elle avait
ete soumise, en toute confidentialite, aux parties en conflit en
octobre 2012.

“Les ministres des affaires etrangères ont reitere leur soutien a
un règlement pacifique et reaffirme leur determination a poursuivre
les negociations”, poursuivait le texte de la declaration. “Les
ministres et les copresidents ont convenu d’une nouvelle discussion
sur le processus de paix dans les semaines a venir”. Le processus
est de fait dans l’impasse depuis l’echec du sommet reunissant les
presidents armeniens et azeri a Sotchi sous l’egide de la Russie en
juin 2011 a Kazan.

mardi 29 janvier 2013, Gari ©armenews.com

ARMENIA’S LOOMING ELECTIONS
Sergey Markedonov

January 28, 2013

2013 will be a presidential election year for all of the countries
of the South Caucasus, with Armenia becoming the first state to begin
its contest. The campaign kicked off in Armenia with the beginning of
the nomination process for candidates on December 25. The vote itself
is scheduled for February 18. What surprises, if any, can we expect
from this election? And how will this campaign impact the general
situation in the South Caucasus?

The upcoming elections look as if they will be primarily symbolic.

First, no matter the manner in which the current election race is held,
it will inevitably be compared to the previous campaign of 2008.

During that race, then-incumbent Robert Kocharyan had served two
terms in office and was prohibited by the Armenian Constitution
from running for a third consecutive term. The transfer of power to
current Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan was accompanied by clashes
between the government and the opposition, resulting in the deaths
of ten people, including eight civilians. This tragedy has haunted
the republic’s political community, ruling elites and the opposition
alike. Thus, the political class of Armenia must, regardless of the
views of the different representatives, demonstrate to the voters they
have learned from the tragedy and that such a civil confrontation
will not happen again. During the parliamentary elections of 2012,
the political system and the political class demonstrated the ability
to avoid clashes and open hostility. The presidential campaign should
serve to consolidate this trend.

For current president Serzh Sargsyan, the elections of 2013 will
bring him a different status within Armenian politics. He will not
be taking part as the successor of the acting head of the state. In
his first term, he has proven to be a self-sufficient politician who
does not fall under the shadow of his predecessor.

In foreign policy, Sargsyan has managed to avoid any serious mistakes.

In the beginning of his term as president, he was strongly criticized
for the forced normalization of relations with Ankara (the so-called
“football diplomacy”). But he has not passed the red line separating
diplomatic compromises from unilateral concessions to the Turkish
government. At the same time he has managed to keep Armenia’s foreign
relations with both Russia and the West in equilibrium.

In relations with the United States and Europe, Sargsyan was
even able to make gains. Washington and Brussels regarded his
predecessor with suspicion and clear displeasure, especially after
the 2003 presidential and parliamentary elections and his hot,
nationalist propaganda. Unlike Kocharyan, Sargzyan was committed to
the peacekeeping rhetoric supported by both Russia and the West on the
issues of the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations or the Armenian-Turkish
rapprochement. At the same time, he did so without departing from
the previously stated goals of Armenia’s foreign policy.

This same approach was applied to the relationship with Russia. On the
one hand, during the Sargzyan presidency Russia and Armenia agreed
(in August 2010) to extend the presence of the a Russian military
base in Gyumri until 2044. On the other, Yerevan has taken an official
line of cautious skepticism towards membership in the Custom Union or
Eurasian Union, both of which are integration projects led by Russia.

The Armenian leadership has based its foreign policy on the principles
of realism and rationalism above all else. As a result, Sargsyan is
perceived to be the best presidential option by both Moscow and the
political leadership of the Western countries.

Sargsyan has also demonstrated his effectiveness in dealing with
the domestic situation in Armenia. Like his predecessor, he has
shown willingness to utilize his soft power domestically in addition
to using more traditional hard pressure on his opponents. In this
context it is impossible to underestimate the role of last year’s
parliamentary campaign in defining the present-day domestic political
configuration. The most important result during that election was
that the Armenian National Congress, led by Levon Ter-Petrosyan (the
first post-Soviet president of Armenia and a thorn in the side of the
Armenian leadership over the past five years), obtained seats in the
legislature. This party had not previously been represented in the
parliament and had instead concentrated its energies on mass public
protests, engaging in clashes that marred the election of 2008.

The inclusion of the Armenian National Congress in the legislature
has promoted opposition activity. This, however, has not been purely
attributable to the personal success of Sargsyan. The opposition has
not been able to put forward any new ideas or viable new political
leaders. And of course the different pillars of the variegated
opposition have not been able to come together on a common language
or common cause with one another, making the work of the ruling
authorities that much easier. As a result, Levon Ter-Petrosyan refused
to participate in this year’s presidential campaign.

The second, equally important issue on the domestic political front
is the search for balance within the ruling elite. The political
landscape in Armenia today is much more complex than that of
the neighboring states in the Caucasus. Unlike Russia, Georgia or
Azerbaijan, Armenia has a number of ruling parties rather than just
one. As such, the real domestic political intrigue in Armenia is
found not between the authorities and opposition, as is common in
the other Caucasus countries, but between the various elite groups
within the administration.

During the 2012 parliamentary campaign, the second most powerful ruling
party, “Prosperous Armenia,” mounted a challenge to the dominant
political force, the Republican Party, which supports Sargsyan. For
this reason the possible nomination of a candidate from “Prosperous
Armenia” became the primary intrigue in Armenian politics during the
run-up to the presidential nominations. On December, 2012 this issue
was removed from the agenda. The leader of “Prosperous Armenia,”
Gagik Tsarukyan, refused to participate in the campaign and the
party itself stated that it would not place its support behind any
of the candidates. For the Republicans and Sargsyan, their nominee,
this decision demonstrated passive support from “Prosperous Armenia”
for their candidate, outlining the current president’s ability to
negotiate with the representatives of various influential groups
within the elite.

The upcoming elections will thus be much less competitive than
the previous campaign. There are serious doubts that the opponents
of the incumbent will be able to offer an entirely new agenda on
either domestic or foreign policy. This does not mean that there is
no intrigue in the elections, just that in this case the intrigue
is not found in considerations of public policy but rather in the
internal dynamics of the administration and the bureaucracy. Moreover,
the current pacified situation in Armenia has been a result of
parliamentary competitiveness, the street activities of opposition and
complicated intra-elite negotiations. The consequences of the current
campaign would be more visible due to new appointments that are likely
to take place this spring. Hence it is critical that those in power do
not make the fatal mistake of succumbing to “dizziness from success.”

The temptation is very great, however, since the main political
troublemakers have decided to step aside during this election.

We should not forget that Armenia is not a strong regional power and
that it does not boast a nuclear deterrent. In many situations, the
domestic dynamics of Armenia are more closely aligned with a variety
of “background factors,” whether in the Middle East or the South
Caucasus. And, of course, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will continue
to have a profound impact on the domestic and foreign policy of the
country. However, it is obvious that without a somewhat harmonious
domestic situation, Armenia will find it much more difficult to carry
out its foreign policy.

Sergey Markedonov is a visiting fellow in the Russia and Eurasia
Program of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Image: Wikimedia Commons/Serouj. CC BY-SA 3.0.

EURASIAN PROJECT FOR ARMENIA: A VIEW FROM MOSCOW

28 January 2013 – 9:38am

Author: VK

Speaking about the prospects of Armenia joining the Eurasian Union,
experts have expressed differing views – from the fact that through
the EAC Yerevan will solve many problems to the point that this
kind of integration is not possible in principle. Meanwhile, most
constructively minded Russian analysts are rather inclined to the
first option.

According to Vladimir Lepekhin, director of the Eurasian Economic
Community Institute, “the idea of Eurasian integration has many
opponents, including abroad. The Russian leadership has often said
that the process of integration so far applies only to the economy,
the economies of post-Soviet countries, they have historically been
a single organism and therefore we are not talking about how to make
this integration move into politics, some geopolitical issues. If
you view the existing trend, the trade turnover, it is possible,
based on these figures, to say that, yes, Armenia still has a large
share of its trade with the European Union, more than 50% to 60%,
and about 40% with the countries of the single economic space with
the countries of the former Soviet Union. On the other hand, in this
share, which is trade with the countries of the former Soviet Union,
Russia’s share is about 95%.

That is, in any case, Russia is the main trading partner of Armenia”.

According to his forecasts, bilateral trade can increase quite
significantly and economic cooperation can gain momentum for
development, and this requires a shift from discussion or dialogue
about prospects to real action: “Russia and Armenia can simply
run several development projects, 3 or 4 large projects in Armenia
with Russian capital, and the economic benefit of our cooperation
will immediately become obvious. Also, we need to bear in mind, and
everyone knows, that Russia and Armenia have historically been quite
close culturally. From the point of view of some geopolitical issues,
Armenia has always regarded Russia as a key partner and ally. We
clearly understand what the problems in Armenia today are. Russia has
always been on the side of Armenia, no matter what the question was –
I mean diplomatic or geopolitical. Another thing is that, given the
complexity of the region and of the relationships that are developing
between Armenia and Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan, Armenia and
Georgia, and so on, Russia cannot, on some questions, be firm enough
to claim its pro-Armenian position. But the prospects are clear”.

Lepekhin says that “speaking about imports of Russian goods to Armenia,
exports goods amounting to about more than 600 million rubles, while
exports to Russia from the Armenian side are about more than 200
million. Compare this to Turkey: goods amounting to 100-120 million
are imported to Armenia, but exports from Armenia to Turkey amount
to only 10 million. That is, almost no Armenian goods are sold in
Turkey. Turkey hampers this flow, or Armenia has nothing to supply
there. A significant part of the import of the products of Armenia to
the Russian Federation is agricultural products. This is true not only
for Armenia. For example, Moldova’s economy is supported by two things:
first – a lot of people from Moldova, and also from Armenia, travel
to Russia to work, and the money sent to Armenia is $10 billion; the
second thing is the agricultural production economy. From my point of
view, Russia is a huge market for Armenia. We know perfectly well what
goods are produced in Armenia, the food industry is developing, there
is wonderful ecological food there. This is a promising direction. If
this direction is reinforced by joint agreements, efforts, investments,
from Russia in the first place, and Russia gives the green light to
Armenia in terms of exports of alcoholic beverages, meat and so on,
Armenia can expect steady and rapid economic growth”.

Lepekhin mentioned three key areas of cooperation, in terms of
agricultural production: alcohol market, meat production, and
agro-tourism.

Speaking about the possibility of the formation of a common ideology
and value system, Alexei Vlasov, editor-in-chief of VK, executive
director of the Center for Political Studies “North-South”, said that
“the construction of a new ideology, a new value orientation, should be
done not from the top down but from the bottom up. Certainly, expecting
the political elites to offer a new ideology of equal importance for
Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and the countries that will be included
in the future in the field of integration is meaningless.

Therefore, only by increasing communication between the civil societies
of the countries that will participate in the Eurasian space may we
reach new motives, new value systems for our development. Why do we
talk of the Russian language in the South Caucasus and Central Asia
so often, not only in Armenia? Because it is a universal means of
communication. This is the first principle, which still keeps us in
the general socio-cultural and humanitarian field. We calmly deal
with you, we understand each other, and some aspects related to our
views and ideological position are also formed from our common past,
from the fact that we are literally and figuratively speaking the
same language. This is so. Therefore, no matter how we argue, no
matter what we discuss, we still understand each other”.

According to Vlasov, “communication must be carried out not only
between prime ministers and presidents, but also representatives of
the educational, cultural, expert and scientific fields. We need a
format that would allow us to hold these repeated meetings and make
such exchanges, adjusting positions on a permanent basis, as I said,
at the level of human, social, cultural and expert communications.

There is a format of the Club “Eurasian Eight.” This is one of the
formats, let’s see, maybe it will be interesting. But as I said, the
formation of a new worldview is not only reading the works by Vernadsky
or Gumilev (some of our colleagues are addicted to it). From my point
of view, I stress once again the principled position that, in addition
to the general history, in addition to the holiday on May 9, the day of
the Great Victory, we should face the future and should form the new
generation, which does not have the experience of the Soviet period,
like the older and middle generation in Russia and countries of the
South Caucasus; for them, first of all, for you we have to create
new motivations, new value systems. If together we will solve this
problem, the question of whether anyone can stop the Eurasian project
will disappear by itself. If the project has broad public support, it
is strong, stable and sustainable. Through our constant communication
we will form the very basis of social support of the Eurasian project”.

MUSLIM GROUP THREATENS EGYPT’S COPTIC CHRISTIANS; TELLS THEM TO ‘PAY TRIBUTE’

Posted GMT 1-28-2013 1:2:16

An armed Islamic movement calling itself the “Brigade of Muslims”
released a statement on Saturday threatening Egypt’s Coptic Christians
and asking them to pay tribute.

“Egypt is an Islamic country and will be ruled according to Shariah,”
the statement added.

The movement threatened all Egyptian media professionals who “mock
religion and Islamic rule,” adding that it has a special list of media
professionals and their persistence in mocking will result in the
“shedding of their blood in the ugliest way.”

The movement explained that it has been established because of the
strife being plotted against the country and the plans of enemies of
Islam, both at home and abroad.

The movement accused Copts of trying to create a “separate Coptic
state,” accused the National Salvation Front of involvement in the
burning of Egypt, and accused the so-called corrupt media of distorting
the image of Muslims and Islamic rule.

The movement noted its approach is jihad, and it would fight the
Egyptian army and Interior Ministry if they do not stand up to “Copts
and their helpers.”

“Let the unbelievers and the hypocrites know we are as keen on dying
for the sake of God as they are keen on life,” the movement confirmed.

Christian Post

WILL RASMUSSEN VISIT ARMENIA?
Naira Hayrumyan

Story from Lragir.am News:

20:28 28/01/2013

Today, on the Army Day, it became known that CSTO Secretary General
Nikolay Borduzha’s delegation and the defense minister of Russia
Sergey Shoygu arrive in Yerevan.

The visit was not announced in case NATO arrives earlier than CSTO.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen suddenly visited Yerevan
last September when the CSTO exercise was scheduled. The exercise
was postponed not to invite Rasmussen and show him CSTO arsenal.

This time Armenia and CSTO were cautious enough not to announce the
visit beforehand. Serzh Sargsyan had announced at the beginning of
his campaign that Armenian-Russian military cooperation and membership
are the axis of Armenia’s security.

It will hardly mark the end of cooperation between NATO and Armenia.

Yerevan gets considerable assistance from NATO for modernization and
training. However, Armenia seems to have made its geopolitical choice.

Experts do not rule out that the choice was not made by Armenia but was
the result of Russia-West agreement which divided zones of influence,
and Armenia and Georgia were “handed” to Russia.

Armenia and CSTO declare further deepening of their relations. The
CSTO Academy has been set up. In fact, CSTO officers will study in
Yerevan, and Armenia will become Russia’s senior “younger brother”
from who the others will learn.

This time Rasmussen will hardly manage to arrive but there is still
a lot of time to go before the presidential election. It is important
whether NATO still wishes to cooperate with Armenia.

PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE FOR GIRLS IN ARMENIA’S ARMY

tert.am
19:48 ~U 28.01.13

Chairman of the National Self-Determination Union (NDU), one of the
presidential candidates Paruir Hairikyan plans large-scale reforms
in Armenia’s army if he is elected Armenia’s president.

The first step will be organization of women’s military service.

“I think that our girls should, on a voluntary basis, serve for ten
months, with 6-month training and 4-month service,” Mr Hairikyan
told journalists.

“When” he is elected Armenia’s president, Mr Hairikyan plans to make
Armenia’s army more transparent, ensure larger-scale application of
the international experience and closer cooperation with NATO.

“I am informed of the negative phenomena in the Russian army. We
should adopt what is positive in both Russia and Europe. NATO is a cut
above. Our army’s general situation can be described as satisfactory.

But satisfactory is followed by good and then by excellent,” Mr
Hairikyan said.

He believed that Armenia’s Minister of Defense Seyran Ohanyan would
succeed in putting an end to all the negative phenomena sooner.

However, there must still be some obstacles.

“At that time there developed a disgraceful situation because they
had to base themselves on criminals. The so-called Yerkrapah, which
was supposed to keep the country, was busy getting offices shut,”
Mr Hairikyan said.

DOCUMENT – TURKEY: INVESTIGATE ATTACKS AGAINST ARMENIAN WOMEN IN ISTANBUL

Amnesty International
Jan 28 2013

AI Index: EUR 44/002/2013�28 January 2013

Turkey: Investigate attacks against Armenian women in Istanbul

Amnesty International calls on the Turkish authorities to carry out
a prompt, thorough and impartial investigation into the series of
attacks on elderly Armenian women in Istanbul.

In the last two months, four attacks, one of them fatal, took place
in Samatya an area historically inhabited by Armenians in central
Istanbul. All four women are Turkish citizens of Armenian origin.

The Turkish authorities have an obligation to investigate any alleged
racist and/or religious bias behind the perpetration of these crimes.

A failure to do so may amount to a violation of the European
Convention of Human Rights, ratified by Turkey, and the prohibition
of discrimination set forth by it.

Hate crimes constitute a serious form of discrimination. State
authorities have not only to refrain from discriminating themselves
but also exercise due diligence to prevent and combat discrimination
from private parties.

It is regrettable that Turkish legislation does not foresee any
legislative and policy measures ensuring that hate motives are
systematically and thoroughly investigated and duly taken into account
in the prosecution and sentencing.

Police insist that they are investigating the cases thoroughly.

However, Amnesty International is concerned at public statements made
by the authorities discounting the possibility of a racist motivation
to the attacks.

Amnesty International believes that the authorities must carry out
a thorough investigation into these attacks without discarding the
possibility of hate motivation from the outset and take steps to
prevent further attacks.

The incidents

In late November 2012, an 87 year-old woman was physically attacked
in the street. She was severely beaten and as a result of the attack
lost the sight in one eye.

A group of three men allegedly attempted to abduct another elderly
woman while on her way to the church on the occasion of the orthodox
Christmas on 6 January. The attackers reportedly fled after the
intervention by other church goers.

On 28 December, an 85 year-old woman was found stabbed to death in
her home. Her jewellery was stolen.

On 22 January, an 80 year-old woman was attacked and beaten as she
was returning to her home.

End/