Author: Kalantarian Kevo

THE CIS COLLECTIVE SECURITY TREATY ORGANIZATION UPS THE LEVEL OF INTERACTION
by Vladimir Vasiliev

WPS Agency
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
December 3, 2008 Wednesday
Russia

THE CIS COLLECTIVE SECURITY TREATY ORGANIZATION BACKED THE
RUSSIAN INITIATIVE OF A NEW SYSTEM OF WARNING AND DEALING WITH
MILITARY-POLITICAL THREATS; Russia’s allies in the CIS Collective
Security Treaty Organization support the idea of a new system of
warning and dealing with military-political threats.

Russia’s partners in the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization
supported the initiative of a new system of warning and dealing with
military-political threats.

According to Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha, the latest meeting
of the Council of Ministers of the CIS Collective Security Treaty
Organization (Armenia, Belarus, Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and
Uzbekistan) in the Armenian capital of Yerevan agreed to draw a new
comprehensive document on European security. Development of a common
antiaircraft defense system was suggested at the meeting as well.

Victor Zavarzin, Chairman of the Defense Committee of the Duma,
commented that the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization
was promoting political and military integration had already
elevated integration between member states to a new level. "We are
already at the level of consultations over problems of strategic
security, nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missile
ethnologies," he said. "Also importantly, we agree on global matters
like reorganization of the global and European security architecture
and rearrangement of the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization
itself."

"The establishment of a directorate of new challenges and threats in
the Secretariat of the Organization became a major milestone," Zavarzin
continued. "As for practical steps, we plan to form an international
army group in the Central Asian region, develop united military
systems for antiaircraft defense, troops control, communications,
and information gathering. Where military-technical cooperation is
concerned, the agreement on its basic principles finally came into
force. Members of the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization are
now permitted to buy military hardware from each other at a discount."

TURKEY’S EXISTENCE NOT DEPENDENT ON EU ENTRY, SAYS BABACAN

Today’s Zaman
Dec 5 2008
Turkey

In the face of rising criticism from Brussels over the Turkish
government’s apparent lack of ambition for reform, Foreign Minister
Ali Babacan has suggested that the issue of EU membership was not a
matter critical to the existence of EU candidate Turkey.

Most recently, during a debate on a draft report on Turkey, the
European Parliament on Tuesday stated that it was impossible for the
ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government to keep its
promise to modernize the country — a promise it voiced after being
elected for the second time in July 2007 with 47 percent of the vote,
without making further political reforms.

The draft report debated by the European Parliament’s Committee on
Foreign Affairs is full of serious warnings for Ankara, which the
draft says has lost its ambition for political reform.

Babacan, who attended a meeting of foreign ministers of NATO member
countries in Brussels, spoke in an interview with the STV news channel
on Wednesday night.

Ups and downs along the EU membership process stem from the issue’s
nature and are normal, Babacan said. The government aims to raise
the standard of living for the Turkish people through reforms, said
Babacan, who is also the country’s chief EU negotiator.

However, "we do not have any issue of belonging. We are not a country
which can only maintain its existence by joining a group or becoming
a member [of a group]. Turkey is already a very important country on
its own with its history and culture," Babacan was quoted as saying
in the interview by the Anatolia news agency.

Turkey, which began entry talks in 2005 but has seen its accession
bid flag because of slow progress on reforms, often argues that the
EU would be short-sighted if it rejected a moderate Muslim country
key to its energy security and foreign policy ambitions.

In its draft report, the European Parliament praised Turkey for
its foreign policy, in particular its rapprochement with Armenia,
but stepped up calls to improve human rights, reform the judiciary
and curb the power of the military.

Turkey, a NATO member, has in recent years boosted diplomatic and
commercial ties with Central Asia, Iran, Russia, the Caucasus and
the Middle East. In October, it won a nonpermanent seat on the UN
Security Council.

With few natural resources of its own, Turkey has positioned itself
as a hub for the transport of Caspian and Central Asian oil and gas
exports to Western markets.

When a separate report by the executive European Commission last
month rapped Turkey for slow progress, Ankara hit back, saying the
EU’s status as a global power was at stake if Turkey was left out. It
also said Ankara was committed to full membership and that it would
push ahead with reforms.

Babacan was also reminded during the interview that Turkish leaders
have been paying fewer visits to Brussels in recent years.

In response, the minister suggested that frequent visits from Ankara
to Brussels took place on the eve of the EU’s December 2004 summit,
when EU leaders said the membership negotiations with Turkey should
begin in October 2005.

During that period, candidate countries were also invited to
EU summits, but such invitations have not since been extended to
candidate countries, Babacan said. He added, however, that Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was planning to pay an official visit
to Brussels in the near future, while President Abdullah Gul also
had plans to visit Brussels.

Both Gul and Erdogan have lent support to the country’s EU membership
process, Babacan said, when reminded that the European Commission’s
report praised Gul for his role in domestic and foreign policy,
while it criticized the government led by Erdogan.

—————————————- —————————————-

Babacan has bilateral talks with Armenian, Azeri ministers in Helsinki
Foreign Minister Ali Babacan had separate talks yesterday with his
Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts in Helsinki, on the sidelines of
a meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE).

No statement was released following the talks, the Anatolia news
agency reported. On Wednesday, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov met with
representatives from Russia, France and the United States, co-leaders
of the OSCE’s Minsk Group, working for a peaceful settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. Anatolia said Babacan assessed the results
of Wednesday’s meeting during talks with Nalbandian and Mammadyarov.

In September, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York,
Babacan, Nalbandian and Mammadyarov had three-way talks to discuss
the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.

Earlier this week, during an official visit to Baku, Babacan said
resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will have a positive
impact on Armenian-Turkish relations, describing the conflict as a
problem not only for Azerbaijan but also for Turkey and the entire
region. Ankara Today’s Zaman with wires

FORUM 18 NEWS SERVICE, Oslo, Norway

The right to believe, to worship and witness
The right to change one’s belief or religion
The right to join together and express one’s belief

========================================== ======
Thursday 4 December 2008
NAGORNO-KARABAKH: "THE LAW IS LIKE RUBBER"

President Sahakyan of the internationally unrecognised entity of
Nagorno-Karabakh is considering a restrictive new Religion Law, Forum 18
News Service has found. The new Law imposes vaguely formulated
restrictions, including: an apparent ban on unregistered religious
activity; state censorship of religious literature; an undefined "monopoly"
given to the Armenian Apostolic Church over preaching and spreading its
faith, while banning "soul-hunting" and restricting others to undefined
"rallying their own faithful". Garik Grigoryan, head of the parliamentary
Commission on State Legal Issues claimed to Forum 18 that "it will be a
more liberal, democratic Law." Members of religious communities have
expressed serious concerns to Forum 18. One member of the Armenian
Apostolic Church rhetorically asked Forum 18: "Where’s the freedom?"
Another described the Law as "like rubber," noting that "you can’t see
exactly how it’s going to be put into practice." The Law also does not
resolve the issue of a civilian alternative to compulsory military service.

NAGORNO-KARABAKH: "THE LAW IS LIKE RUBBER"

By Felix Corley, Forum 18 News Service <;

Members of religious minority communities in the internationally
unrecognised Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh in the South Caucasus have
expressed concerns to Forum 18 News Service about restrictions on freedom
of thought, conscience and belief in a new Religion Law. The Law has passed
through the entity’s parliament and needs the signature of the entity’s
President, Bako Sahakyan, to come into force. Much, but not all, of the new
Law is copied word-for-word from Armenia’s Religion Law as adopted in 1991
and amended in 1997 and 2001.

The main restrictions in Karabakh’s Law are: an apparent ban on
unregistered religious activity; state censorship of religious literature;
the requirement for 100 adult citizens to register a religious community;
an undefined "monopoly" given to the Armenian Apostolic Church over
preaching and spreading its faith while restricting other faiths to
similarly undefined "rallying their own faithful"; and the vague
formulation of restrictions, making the intended implementation of many
articles uncertain.

The new Law had its first reading in parliament in October, Garik
Grigoryan, head of parliament’s Commission on State Legal Issues, told
Forum 18 from the capital Stepanakert on 2 December. He said that of the 21
deputies present during the final vote on 26 November, 16 were in favour of
the Law, three were against and two abstained. If it is approved by the
President, the Law will replace completely Karabakh’s current 1996 Religion
Law.

The President has one month to sign or reject the Religion Law from the
point at which he receives it. It is unclear when the President received
it, but it had its second, final, parliamentary reading on 26 November. If
approved, the Law will come into force ten days later.

Grigoryan refused to speculate on whether President Sahakyan will sign the
Law. Forum 18 was unable to reach anyone at the Presidential Administration
in Stepanakert on 2 or 3 December to find out if the president is likely to
sign it. Sahakyan was in Geneva in late November and arrived in Moscow on 1
December.

Despite the Law’s restrictions, which violate international human rights
standards, Grigoryan of parliament’s Commission on State Legal Issues
defends the Law. "It will be a more liberal, democratic Law," he insisted
to Forum 18.

Article 5 requires 100 adult citizens for a community to apply for legal
status. As in Armenia, religions must be based on "a historic holy book",
must be "part of the worldwide system of the contemporary religious
community" and "directed to spiritual values". The government’s Department
for Ethnic Minority and Religious Affairs has to give its expert conclusion
on a community before registration can be approved. The Department can also
go to court to have an organisation liquidated, if it violates the Law.

Although the Law does not specifically ban unregistered religious
activity, Article 25 requires all religious organisations to register or
re-register within six months of the new Law coming into force.

Grigoryan dismissed fears that the the Department for Ethnic Minority and
Religious Affairs might give a negative verdict on a religious community
officials do not like, and bar it from gaining legal status. "That’s not
possible," he claimed. "And if it does happen people can challenge the
decision in court."

He insisted that the Law does ban unregistered religious activity, and
rejected any criticism of Article 25’s registration requirements. "This
isn’t absurd – why else would we have adopted the Law?" Asked what would
happen to a group of friends who might get together in a private home to
pray, Grigoryan responded: "Well, that would be OK." He then pointed out
that Karabakh is still under martial law, when unauthorised gatherings can
be forbidden.

In a potentially significant change from the parallel article in Armenia’s
Law, the Karabakh Law removes the specific recognition that registered
religious organisations can hold services "in homes and residences of
citizens" from the list of suitable places as given in Armenia’s Law.

One religious minority told Forum 18 on 3 December that "we are worried by
the permission required to rent premises for meetings and the failure to
declare specifically – unlike in Armenia’s Law – that religious meetings
can be held in private homes."

The Jehovah’s Witnesses – who have some 300 adherents in Karabakh – point
out that they have already faced problems this year over rental of a
meeting place. The Prosecutor’s Office in Stepanakert wrote in June both to
the local community and to the owner of a building which he rented to the
community for worship. "The letter said that because the community is not
registered it has no right to rent anywhere," the Jehovah’s Witnesses told
Forum 18. "But this is wrong, as the rental was done personally by one of
our people."

The Jehovah’s Witnesses say that, if the new Law is approved, they will
try to seek registration. However, they report that they met Ashot
Sargsyan, the head of the Department for Ethnic Minority and Religious
Affairs, in early November. "He told us that as long as he is working for
the government we will not get registration," they told Forum 18. "He said
openly he’s a member of the Armenian Church."

Article 17 – like the corresponding article in the Armenian Law –
specifically gives the Armenian Apostolic Church a "monopoly" of preaching
its faith, building new churches, contributing to the "spiritual
edification of the people" including by teaching in state-run educational
institutions, conducting charitable activity and maintaining permanent
religious representatives in institutions such as hospitals, old people’s
homes, military units and prisons.

One controversial provision in Article 8 – copied from Armenia’s Law –
bans "soul-hunting", a derogatory term in Armenian for seeking converts.
Parliamentary deputy Grigoryan refused to explain what "soul-hunting"
meant. "That’s how it is written in the Law we’ve adopted, I can’t explain
it."

Uncertainty over the meaning of the ban on "soul-hunting" was also
expressed by a Jehovah’s Witness. "They don’t explain what this means," he
complained to Forum 18 on 3 December.

While the extensive rights of the Armenian Church are set out in Article
17, the rights of religious organisations set out in Article 7 are all
inward-looking, with the first right specified as "rallying their own
faithful around them". The article also allows them to train their leaders,
conduct services in their own premises and in state institutions at the
request of residents who belong to the religious community.

"It is bad that the Law allows only the Armenian Apostolic Church to
preach its faith," the Jehovah’s Witness told Forum 18. "This is against
the Constitution." Although Article 10 of Karabakh’s Constitution gives the
Armenian Church the "exclusive mission" in the spiritual life of the
people, Article 26 guarantees religious freedom and the freedom to express
religious views.

In clear contradiction to Article 17’s granting of a "monopoly" to the
Armenian Church, Article 7 allows all of them to conduct charitable
activity.

Karabakh’s new Law gives a place of primacy to the Armenian Church in
Article 6, and only this Church is mentioned in relation to the restitution
of religious property. This is despite the fact that several mosques still
stand – even if badly damaged during fighting in the early 1990s over
Karabakh and in subsequent reprisal attacks – in areas controlled by the
Karabakh authorities. The mosques have been abandoned since the Azeri and
Kurdish populations were driven out during the war.

Another controversial provision comes in Article 22, which is not present
in Armenia’s Religion Law. This Article hands the state "control" over the
production, distribution and import of religious literature and objects.
The Article does not clarify the exact nature of such "control".

Parliamentary deputy Grigoryan dismissed any concerns over the government
controls on religious literature. "It’s not exactly censorship," he told
Forum 18. "But permission will be needed for religious literature. You can
call it what you like."

A Stepanakert-based member of the Brotherhood, an evangelical grouping
within the Armenian Apostolic Church which has about a dozen groups in
Karabakh, who wished to remain unnamed, expressed scepticism about how
realistic it will be to control religious literature in practice. He
expected, he told Forum 18 on 3 December, that the government will try to
ban any Jehovah’s Witness, Baha’i, Hare Krishna or Muslim literature. His
preferred solution was for a group of Christian leaders to get together to
decide which literature was acceptable.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses pointed out to Forum 18 that they have already had
problems over religious literature controls. On 20 July, eight minibuses
bringing back more than 120 of their members to Stepanakert from a
convention in the southern Armenian town of Kapan were stopped at a police
control point on re-entry to Karabakh. Officers told them they were going
to search the minibuses. Asked to show documents authorising the searches,
the police admitted they did not have any. Then one policeman showed his
police certificate and said this was the basis for the search. When the
Jehovah’s Witnesses said they would lodge a complaint, police told them
they could complain to whoever they liked. "For seven hours they rummaged
through their possessions in a degrading manner," Jehovah’s Witnesses told
Forum 18. "They confiscated all the literature except the Bibles." None of
the literature has been returned.

Some members of religious minorities think that – as in neighbouring
Armenia – not much if any state control will be imposed in practice. "It
depends how the new Law will be implemented," the general secretary of
Armenia’s Baptist Union Asatur Nahapetyan told Forum 18 from the Armenian
capital Yerevan on 3 December. "It will take about six months for it to be
clear what is happening." The Armenian Baptist Union also covers Karabakh.

Echoing this view is Hamlet Zakaryan, the Armenia-based head of the
Brotherhood. "The Law is like rubber," he told Forum 18 from Yerevan on 3
December. "Even though it reflects some Soviet thinking, you can’t see
exactly how it’s going to be put into practice."

Nahapetyan of the Baptist Union pointed out that the six affiliated
Baptist congregations in Karabakh are not restricted, "though there is less
freedom than in Armenia". He stressed that they were able to hold a youth
conference in Stepanakert in October without problems.

The Stepanakert-based member of the Brotherhood thinks the new Law will
not restrict the Brotherhood’s activity, but is concerned about
restrictions that he believes will be imposed on other religious
communities. "I don’t like the text all that much," he told Forum 18. "It
speaks of freedom of conscience but only the Armenian Church has the right
to evangelise. Any other community can only work among its own members.
Where’s the freedom?"

Gagik Mirzoyan, a member of a Council of Churches Baptist congregation,
told Forum 18 on 3 December that he was not familiar with the new Law and
did not know if it will make life more difficult for their small
congregations. "As with all the congregations in our Council of Churches
our position is not to seek registration," he told Forum 18. He said that
in recent years their congregations’ activity has not been restricted in
Karabakh.

Forum 18 has been unable to find out why a new Religion Law has been
adopted and where the impetus came from. The Brotherhood member expressed
some surprise that Karabakh’s politicians have devoted attention to it. "I
don’t think ordinary members of the public are particularly bothered by the
religious situation."

The telephone of Sargsyan, head of the government’s Department for Ethnic
Minority and Religious Affairs, went unanswered each time Forum 18 called
on 2 and 3 December. Others told Forum 18 that Sargsyan was on leave.

The new Religion Law does not resolve the issue of an alternative to
Karabakh’s compulsory military service for all young men. One Jehovah’s
Witness, Areg Hovhanesyan, is nearing the end of a four-year sentence
imposed by a court in Stepanakert in February 2005 for refusing military
service on grounds of religious conscience (see F18News 27 March 2008
< e_id=1105>).

Jehovah’s Witnesses say he is being well-treated in the prison in Shusha
not far from Stepanakert, where he is even allowed out while looking after
animals. They say family members are able to visit him.

Mirzoyan, the Baptist, was earlier beaten and imprisoned for refusing to
swear the military oath and bear weapons during his military service. He
was later allowed to serve as a cook without the oath and without a gun,
and completed his service in January 2008 (see F18News 27 March 2008
< e_id=1105>). (END)

Further coverage of freedom of thought, conscience and belief in
Nagorno-Karabakh is at
< mp;religion=all&country=22>.

A printer-friendly map of the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh is
available at
< s/atlas/index.html?Parent=asia&Rootmap=azerba& gt;
within the map titled ‘Azerbaijan’.
(END)

© Forum 18 News Service. All rights reserved. ISSN 1504-2855
You may reproduce or quote this article provided that credit is given to
F18News

Past and current Forum 18 information can be found at

GOVERNMENT CANNOT ASSESS YET POSSIBLE SCALE OF IMPACT OF GLOBAL CRISIS ON ARMENIAN ECONOMY

Noyan Tapan

Dec 3, 2008

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 3, NOYAN TAPAN. Despite a decline in exports and the
withdrawal of Russian capital from the country, the global economic
crisis has not yet affected Armenia, the RA minister of finance Tigran
Davtian said when responding to a question of deputy Samvel Sargsyan
at the December 3 sitting of the RA National Assembly.

In his words, Armenia avoided the impact of the first stage of the
crisis – the financial crisis as the country’s financial system has
not yet integrated into the global system, and besides, it is quite
small. As regards the economic crisis, it has just begun and today
it is impossible to assess the time and scale of its impact on Armenia.

The finance minister said that the government has taken some steps
to soften the impact of the crisis. In particular, it was decided
to allocate a sum equivalent to 50 million dollars with the aim of
assisting small and medium business. Besides, negotiations are being
conducted with the World Bank on doubling the financial assistance
to Armenia. According to T. Davtian, the matter concerns a sum of
about one billion dollars.

CBA BOARD ISSUES LICENSES TO ARMENIAN STOCK EXCHANGE AND CENTRAL DEPOSITORY OF ARMENIA

ARKA
Dec 2, 2008

YEREVAN, December 3. /ARKA/. Board of the Central Bank of Armenia
re-registered and issued a license to the Armenian Stock Exchange
(Armex) open joint stock company and the Central Depository of Armenia
open joint stock company.

The respective decision was made at yesterday’s sitting of the CBA
Board presided over by the CBA Chairman Artur Javadyan, the CBA Press
Service reported.

Armenian Stock Exchange (Armex) is a self-regulating organization
registered in Armenia on February 13 2001 embracing 21 dealer
organizations. On November 9 Armex was reorganized to an open joint
stock company. OMX has been the 100% owner of Armex and the Central
Depository since January 7 2008.

The Central Depository of Armenia (CDA) is an organization that keeps
register of securities, carries out clearing and mutual settlement
functions. The CDA was reorganized from a self-regulating organization
to an open joint stock company on November 9 2007.

ARMENIA FUND HAS TURNED INTO A PRESIDENTOMETER
Hakob Badalyan

Lragir.am
13:26:25 – 01/12/2008

Armenia All-Armenian Fund held its annual telethon during which,
according to the official news release, 35 million dollars was
raised. It was twice as much as the sum raised in the previous
telethons, because the highest sum raised previously had been about
15 million dollars. All the nation can do is to celebrate and take
pride in such a growth, especially considering the global economic
crisis. If there were not for the crisis, perhaps at least one hundred
million dollars would be raised. On the other hand, probably the
crisis is the reason why so much money was raised. The point is that
perhaps the famous formula has worked which the Armenian government
has been circulating recently. It is the formula of the capital
which is bothered by the global crisis and is looking for a calm
place. Apparently, the wealthy of other nationalities participated
in the pan-Armenian telethon as well, who preferred sending their
money into Armenia Fund, knowing that it will go to stable Armenia,
far from crisis and trouble.

This hypothesis may seem to many to be an unserious approach to the
serious pan-Armenian event. However, the problem is that this serious
pan-Armenian event is made unserious by those who are organizing
it. Many may think that the content of the TV program is meant which
is unchanged for many years.

Som e details change, of course, such as the song and the video. For
instance, one year the video is shot in front of North Avenue, the
next year in front of the Erebuni Hotel, and the next will probably
be shot in front of a newly-built elite apartment building, but the
content of the telethon remains the same, with the same faces, the
same emotional speeches, the same "Armenian design", which allows
supposing that every year a lot of money is wasted on that program
and on air tickets and several weeks of accommodation for the groups
of officials, actors, hosts, showmen, since it is enough to show the
video of the previous years. For instance, the video of the telethon
could be shown for at least three years, and the money that would be
saved could be donated for a program that the foundation carries out.

Although I spoke for an entire paragraph, nevertheless the unserious
approach of the organizers does not concern the content of the
TV program.

The problem is the approach towards the telethon as a phenomenon. The
impression is that we are competing with ourselves to prove
something. The telethons, the pan-Armenian donations have become
something like a math quiz where only figures are important. It
is important who donated the most, who gives little although could
have donated more, what percentage of one’s possessions one gives,
and how much was raised in the end to announce another re cord. And
the record should be presented as another merit of the government.

For instance, under one president the Armenians raised this much,
it means that president is the best. In other words, Armenia Fund
has turned into an instrument for measuring the reputation of the
president with money, a peculiar presidentometer. More exactly, they
have turned it such, thinking that it affects the society. However,
the real effect is that the society, the Armenian society, is gradually
becoming disappointed with the pan-Armenian donations. Evidence to
this is the sums donated by ordinary donators, which is shrinking year
by year, and records are set through donations by millionaires. The
2008 telethon is a classic example. 35 million dollars was raised. In
fact, however, only 5 million is a pan-Armenian donation in the direct
sense of the word, and the other 30 million had been pledged by the
Armenian millionaires at a dinner with the president of Armenia a
few days before.

Certainly, the millionaires are also Armenians but the problem is
that if 80 percent of the pan-Armenian donation is raised by a few
Armenian millionaires, and only 10-20 percent has real pan-Armenian
geography, serious doubts about the pan-Armenian nature of Armenia
Fund occur. More exactly, those doubts occur among the Armenians
worldwide, or may already have occurred, since the volume of donations
is "sustained" by millionaires only. Why is it so? T his is a question
which requires a serious study, a serious analysis of the activities
of the foundation, reconsideration of approaches, unbiased summary of
results. However, it is possible that nobody cares for this because
the millionaires are important, with whom the government may always
make arrangements, deals on money in return for something, and take
care of propaganda. And the practical aspect will be what it will be.

Hurriyet, Turkey
Nov 28 2008

First steps for better relations began in 1995

YEREVAN – The reconcilliation process between Armenia and Turkey began
long before President Gül’s visit to Yerevan with the first
steps taking place in Paris in 1995, with the Armenian Diaspora
Research Center and the Turkish-Armenian Democratic Dialogue Movement

Throughout the years, Armenian and Turkish individuals have played a
vital role in fostering dialogue between the two societies in an
effort to reconcile their rocky past.

Raffi Hermonn is one of those individuals, who since 1995, has made a
great effort to increase communication between the estranged
communities. Hermoon said he was the only journalist of Armenian
origin to be registered in the Turkish Journalists’ Union by the end
of the 1970s. He moved to France just before the military coup of 1980
but kept on believing in his dream that Turks and Armenians may one
day become friends again, despite all the tragedies of the past.

He was a leading figure in social developments in France aimed at
fostering such dialogue, establishing the "Centre de Recherce sur la
Diaspora Armenienne "(Armenian Diaspora Research Center), and the
Turkish-Armenian Democratic Dialogue Movement.

Later, he got together with Jean Claude Kebapcian, a prominent name in
the 1968 movement in France. Hermonn spoke to the Hurriyet Daily News
& Economic Review on his works over the past 12 years. "In the
mid-90s, we started the Turkish-Armenian Democratic Dialogue Movement,
an organization that (former President) Jacques Chirac labelled the
‘diplomacy of the people.’"

Armenia vs. diaspora Kebapcian and Hermonn were able to introduce many
Turkish intellectuals to the diaspora in France, particularly
AyÅ?enur and Ragıp Zarakolu, two of the founders of Belge
Publications. However, not every step was successful and they faced
many difficulties trying to initiate dialogue.

One example was an attempt to actualize the Turkish-Armenian Dialogue
Congress in 2000, while the French National Assembly was debating
recognizing Armenian claims of genocide. "French Armenians took action
and put pressure on Armenia to not give passports to
attendees. Likewise, pressure was put on the French counsel at Yerevan
to not give visas to Armenians," said Hermonn.

He said, President Robert Kocharian and Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian then made an unexpected statement, "Kocharian and Oskanian
were saying ‘every effort to support Turkish-Armenian dialogue is
beneficial. Let the Armenian youth do it, there is no harm in that.’"

Taboo book Hermonn said this was the first step in recent developments
of a Turkey-Armenia reconciliation. "The congress took place in a
French senate chamber. Jirayr Libaridian, advisor of former president
Petrosian, was in attendence as was Lavrenti Parsexyan, ex-director of
the Genocide Museum in Yerevan, on the stage next to Turkish
intellectuals."

Hermonn’s life course changed with a telephone call from Turkey in
1994. On the other end of the line was Pars TuÄ?lacı, an
ethnically Armenian Turk, who spoke of a book that had an unorthodox
thesis on the Armenian issue and about to be published in Turkey.

The "Ermeni Tabusu" (The Armenian Taboo), by Yves Ternon was published
by Belge Publications. "I could not believe my ears when I heard such
a work had been published," said Hermonn. Less than a month later, he
heard the news of a Zarakolu couple being prosecuted and the
publishing house being bombed. Hermonn decided to take action, he
prepared a file on what had happened to the Zarakolu couple and
presented it to some French foundations. Hermonn said 16 foundations,
including France Liberte, founded by Danielle Mitterand, the wife of
the ex-president François Mitterand, approved the file. The
document, requesting a reconsideration of the conviction of the
Zarakolu couple, was presented to then prime minister, Tansu
Ã?iller, during a visit to France.

"There was no ‘good Turk’ for the Armenians, however, I was presenting
a Turk who was risking his own life," said Hermonn. He said they
invited the Zarakolu couple to the 80th anniversary of the events of
1915, "Even the Dashnaks were silent."

Hermonn’s has summed up his 12 years dedicated to the cause, "I
knowingly called out for dialogue from France. I acted via the French,
which was very important. Otherwise, I would have faced even greater
difficulty. I received lots of threats during the period. The Armenian
diaspora was claiming there is no such thing as a good Turk," but they
were wrong.

Panorama.am

13:51 28/11/2008

Armenia has ambitious plans concerning participation in World
`Expo-2010′ exposition

Armenia has ambitious plans concerning participation in World
`Expo-2010′ exposition in Shanghai, which is a unique opportunity to
present everything, which the country is proud of, to the world.

As the Head of organizational creative group from Armenia, Chairman of
the Union of Artists Karen Aghamyan stated in an interview to
«Mediamax», the government allocated over $2.5mln for
preparing the Armenian exposition.

The organizers of `Expo-2010′ are presented the preliminary
application to provide Armenia a pavilion of 1000 square meters `
three times more, than at the previous expositions of `Expo’ in
Hannover and Aichi.

`We intent to present all economy spheres of Armenia, capable of
causing interest among the visitors of the exposition, the number of
which, according to the assessment of the organizers, may exceed
100mln’, Karen Aghamyan stated.

The Armenian government established a special commission to get ready
for `Expo-2010′. The commission is headed by the Minister of Economy
Nerses Yeritsyan. The direct preparation for the exposition is taken
up by Armenian Development Agency and its Director Robert Harutyunyan.

Karen Aghamyan informed that at the present stage, a few projects of
the exposition are being considered, however, following the results of
numerous discussion, its topic is already defined – `Armenians in
world cities’.

We intend to choose the most extraordinary project to attract maximum
attention of the visitors, since at `Expo-2010′ we are to compete with
many countries, in particular, with Japan, the exposition of which
will be located next to ours’, Karen Aghamyan stated.

Within the framework of the exposition, the Day of Armenia will take
place, during which the presence of top leadership of the country is
expected.

Karen Aghamyan stressed that the working group is open for proposals
and will welcome all interesting ideas.

The World `Expo-2010′ exposition will take place in Shanghai in
May-October, 2010. Its topic is `Better City, Better Life’.

Source: Panorama.am

THE SETTLEMENT OF KARABAKH ISSUE ON THE LEGAL PLANE
Lilit Poghosyan

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
26 Nov 08
Armenia

Ex Spokesman for the Foreign Ministry, at present independent expert
Ara Papyan has his own formula for the settlement of Karabakh issue,
which he is ready to share with the local authorities, as the only
practical and effective version for the settlement of the conflict.

Below we introduce the remarks of the political scientist.

"In general it is wrong to observe this issue separate from
Armenian-Turkish relations. They also don’t do so. After his visit to
Armenia Gyul left for Baku, after signing the Minedorf declaration
Aliev left for Anakara. How can we separate these two issues when
Turkey and Azerbaijan act as a tandem? That is to say in the united
front?

Even historically the issue of the recognition of the three Caucasian
republics, in 1918-20, was discussed in a united "package", because
these issues are in reality mutually linked. Karabakh issue is part
of the Armenian Cause.

"The Azerbaijanis announce that Karabakh can become self -determined,
but only in the framework of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and
immunity of the borders."

"The "immunity of the borders" is related to those borders that have
been formed legally, based on the international law. In our case,
we could have referred to that principl e, had Armenian-Azerbaijani
border been enshrined in the corresponding legal document. Which
means what we need firstly is a political decision about allocating
concrete regions to Armenians and Azerbaijanis, only after which could
Armenia and Azerbaijan sign an agreement, with a clear description
of Armenian-Azerbaijani border.

This is called delimitation, which should have been followed by
demarcation, only after that can we speak about the existing
borders. There is no similar document in case of Armenia and
Azerbaijan, or Armenia and Georgia, there are certain administrative
"lines" defined by the decisions of the parties during the
soviet times. There have been no real decisions, only abstract
announcements. Consequently the principle of the international law
can’t refer to illegal realities, illegality and crime never give
birth to the right."

"Especially because Azerbaijan became self-determined, that is to
say declared its independence in 1918-1920, within the borders of
the Republic of Azerbaijan, which didn’t include Karabakh."

"Definitely! And my proposal is as follows: the process stopped after
the sovietalization of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, in April
1920 Azerbaijan was sovietalized, and the legal process stopped. What
document was there before April, the document of February 24. So
let’s return to that document and bring it to life. Let’s clarify the
borders consi dering today’s realities. Why not exchange of enclaves,
in case of a need, and thus we will get a logical borderline."

"By your assessment is Turkey really ready to take actions for the
settlement of Armenian-Turkish relations?"

"I don’t think so. You can’t say that Turkey doesn’t want
Armenia to re-establish its sovereignty in Karabakh, based on
Azerbaijan’s interests. No! Turkey is not doing it based on its
own interests. Turkey wants Armenia to be vulnerable. Because they
understand that they have committed a crime against Armenia and the
weaker we are in terms of economy the easier for them to maintain
the existing situation.

My approach in terms of both Karabakh and Armenian-Turkish relations is
clear, because from political, military, and economic point of view we
are weaker than them and so we must shift to the legal field. Minedorf
declaration provides this chance, it enshrines that the settlement
of the conflict must be based on the norms of the international law
and the legal documents based on them.

If someone has taken your flat and is living there with no rights,
you must show your right to property and prove that he has taken that
territory illegally."

"Whereas the Co-Chairmen state and it is also underscored in Minedorf
declaration that the settlement of the issue must be political and
not legal."

"The majority of territorial disputes are solved on legal bases and
the political settlement as a rule leads to the deadlock, because
political solution presumes coincidence of interests. Political
solution is possible only if Armenia accepts that the conflict must
be solved in the framework of Azerbaijan’s "territorial integrity."

In this context the maximum that Armenian party can do is the thing
that the co-Chairmen propose as a mutual-concession. That is to say, if
we want to become self-determined we must cede all the territories that
are out of Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Province. All the Azerbaijanis
that have once left Karabakh – return, and after some time hold a
referendum of self-determination. If we choose that way we will not
achieve anything.

And if we accept that it is a legal issue, the clarification of
Armenian -Azerbaijani border, the question of the Armenian deportees
from Dashtayin Karabakh, Shahumyan and why not Baku, appears here
and their rights should also be considered."

GEORGIA TIMES OBTAINS DOCUMENT RECONFIRMING GEORGIA’S PLANS TO INVADE SOUTH OSSETIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.11.2008 15:50 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Following the end of the August military operation
there was a rather long argument on "who was the first"? Who initiated
the military aggression by planning actions beforehand and who had
to respond? As a result the world community admitted: it was Mikheil
Saakashvili who started the war. GeorgiaTimes reports it obtained a
document that reconfirms that Georgia’s armed forces were preparing
the invasion in South Ossetia.

(Translation from the Georgian language)

Signed away to: Executive Officer Signature 07.08.08

Confidential Copy â~D-4 Infantry Brigade 4 HQ Vasiani 05.15 August
07 2008

Interim order â~D- 02 Map â~D- 1:50000, Ð~Z-38-64-Ð~P, Ð~Z-38-90-Ð’,
Ð~Z-38-64-Ð’, Ð~Z-38-64-Ð" Edition 1987 Local time

1.Situation

No change (see Interim order â~D- 01)

Ð~P. Counter force

No change (see Interim order â~D- 01)

B. Proper forces:

No change (see Interim order â~D- 01)

Higher commander task

For task group to carry out military operation in Samachablo (South
Ossetia) region and within 72 hours defeat the enemy. Restore Georgia’s
jurisdiction over the region.

Higher commander plan

– Fast performance of military operation;

– Decrease in risk of destroying civilians and their property;

– Elimination of counter force by localized strikes;

– Proper defense;

G. Affixed units

None

Registration seal 7.08.08

2. Task

4th infantry brigade units are set in combat alert status at the
location not later than 11.00 am August 7 2008 in order to support
the task group.

3. Execution

Commander’s plan:

– quick performance of military operation;

– decrease in risk of destroying civilians and their property;

– elimination of counter force by localized impacts;

– proper defense;

– offensive and defensive operations in the battle zone;

– city functionality protection;

Final result:

– detection of antiseparatist forces in the region;

– establishment of peaceful and secure environment in the region.

4th brigade general borders (coordinates according to encrypting map):

In the north: к. 858864: к. 056868.

In the east: к. 056868 к. 112732

In the south: к. 112732: к. 977690: к. 951682: к. 868709

In the west: к 868 709

4th brigade internal borders:

infantry battalion 41:

In the north: к. 858864; к. 935865.

In the east: к. 935865 к. 977690

In the south: к. 977690; к. 948681.. 878708

In the west: к 878708; к. 858864.

infantry battalion 42:

In the north: к. 935865; к. 973867

In the east: к. 973867; к. 025748; к. 046718

In the south: к. 046718; к. 977690

In the west: к 977690; к. 935865

infantry battalion 43:

In the north: к. 9738674; к. 056868

In the east: к. 056868; к. 112732

In the south: к. 112732; к. 046718.

In the west: к 046718; к. 025748. . 973867

Commander’s Critical Information (CCIR) (а) Priority intelligence
requirements (PIR)

1.Tools/methods/modes using which antiseparatist forces can destabilize
security in the region.

2. Where does direct confrontation of forces take place?

3. Who supports antiseparatist forces?

4. Where are camps and shelters of antiseparatist forces located?

5. Where is their firepower located?

6. Counter force number and applied means?

7. Where and when will enemy’s various units execute offensive against
our forces

8. Who are influential persons (leaders) in the battle zone.

Risks

-Russian peacekeeping bases in Samachablo region imply risk of
provocations in case of bringing down fire on them;

– Risk that during transfer of civilians and refugees there might be
separatist units members among them that would destabilize situation
in the rear.

Orders to manoeuvre elements:

– for manoeuvre elements (battalions 41, 42 and 43) to prepare
reconnaissance platoons for tactic reconnaissance operations in their
zones of responsibility;

– for manoeuvre elements to train offensive and defensive operations
(offensive in settlements, penetration into buildings, search,
assault and seizure).

Orders to support units:

For brigade support units (tank battalion; artillery battalion;
procurement battalion and independent companies) – to be set in full
combat alert status in order to support manoeuvre elements and be
ready for march to the brigade assembly point. 0259.

Security measures:

– keep secure distance during march;

– units guarantee protection of flags by proper forces during
relocation.

4. Material and technical support.

No change (see Interim order â~D- 01)

5. Management and communication.

No change (see Interim order â~D- 01) 4th infantry brigade commander
Major signature G. Kalandadze Overleaf:

–Boundary_(ID_v4G2xNkEUlF14P97/BQNWg)- –