Author: Karagyozian Lena

THE INDEPENDENT: TURKISH ‘PRIZE SLIPPING AWAY’ FROM EU
The New Anatolian
Oct 18 2006
Turkey is a “prize slipping away” from the hands of the European
Union because of the deadlock over the Cyprus issue and the French
Parliament’s passage of the Armenian bill, warned British daily The
Independent yesterday.
The newspaper, in its leading editorial on Tuesday, said, “Turkey’s
bid to enter the EU received a double blow last week. First came the
parking of talks on Ankara’s membership after objections by Greece and
[Greek] Cyprus.
And then there was the vote by the French Assembly to outlaw the
denial of the Armenian ‘genocide’.” The paper added that EU foreign
ministers met on Monday with their Turkish counterpart to repair some
of the damage.
Stressing that the real diplomatic crunch will come next month when a
report is due from the EU’s enlargement minister on Turkey’s progress
in implementing reforms since membership talks began a year ago, The
Independent stated that if the report criticizes Ankara’s refusal to
open Turkish ports to Greek Cypriot ships and planes, as expected, EU
leaders at their next summit may decide to freeze entry negotiations
entirely. “Once frozen, they would be very hard to re-start,” the
newspaper warned.
Citing the presence of a general pessimism about the EU enlargement
process, The Independent commented that the remarks by European
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso over the weekend are
a reflection of the pessimism about Turkey’s chances to join the
25-nation bloc. The newspaper stated that although previous statements
had indicated that Turkey’s membership talks could last 15 years,
Barroso in his latest remarks predicted that the process would take
20 years.
Concerning the French Parliament’s passage of a bill introducing
prison terms and fines to those who question the Armenian genocide
claims, the newspaper commented that although French President Jacques
Chirac apologized to Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan over the incident and
said the French government is opposed to the law, the newspaper said,
“However, together with this move the damage has already been done.”
Underlining that the French Parliament’s decision served the interests
of nationalist circles in Turkey who oppose the country’s membership
in the Union, the newspaper also stated that Turkish supporters of
EU membership are having a hard time defending the self-sacrifices
for accession.
Describing Turkey as a “prize slipping away,” the daily said,
“Whereas the membership of this Muslim country would be an ideological
success for Europe. In this way, values like human rights, freedom
of _expression and a liberal economy will be strengthened in a land
bordering the Middle East.
However, in case of failure to continue political relations between
Turkey and Europe, none of those will materialize.”

AZERBAIJANI ARMY MOST POWERFUL IN CAUCASUS, ALIYEV THINKS
By Aghavni Harutyunian
AZG Armenian Daily
19/10/2006
Aliyev Either Does Not Know the State of Azeri Army of Caucasus’s
Geography
Azerbaijani army is the most powerful in the Caucasus today. Aliyev
junior’s flatulency have strangely reached a level that permits himself
to make such statements from Al Jazeera’s air forgetting how corrupted
the Azeri army is and military capacity of the other Caucasian states.
Besides praising his own army, Ilham Aliyev told Al Jazeera that the
Prague Process is the final stage of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
and if “Armenia’s destructive policy aborts this stage then there
will be no possibility to continue the negotiations.”
Meanwhile, Aliyev junior understands this stage as a link in
step-by-step regulation – “withdrawal of Armenian occupation forces
from Azerbaijani territories, discussion of Nagorno Karabakh’s status
and of strengthening its security system and peacekeeping activities.”
Day.az agency quoted president Aliyev as saying that if there is
are no negotiations, then Azerbaijan will change its strategy and
tactics and will discuss other options. Interestingly, the recent
talks about the impossibility of a new war forced Aliyev to state
that the military option is Azerbaijan’s last resort.
Applying unique political and economic “logic”, Aliyev concludes
that Armenia has condemned itself to isolation “by carrying out an
aggressive policy towards its neighbors.” “In terms of diplomacy,
Armenia is a losing country,” the Azeri leader says and adds that
Armenia can be of no interest to foreigners. This view of Aliyev is
totally grounded in his oil pipeline. Ilham Aliyev rounds of saying
that neither the Diaspora nor the foreign diplomats can help Armenia.
As to Iranian-Armenian relations, Azerbaijan shows concern about them.

NEXT YEAR AZERI ECONOMY WILL BE TEN TIMES BIGGER THAN ARMENIAN ONE: AZERI PRESIDENT
ARMINFO News Agency
October 17, 2006 Tuesday
“We are making active efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict by peace
but, at the same time, we are getting increasingly convinced that,
without serious military, political, diplomatic an economic levers,
it will be hard to put an end to the occupation of our lands,” Azeri
President Ilham Aliyev says in an Oct 15 interview to Al Jazeera
TV channel.
“By involving the UN General Assembly, the CE, the Organization of
the Islamic Conference and other international organizations in the
Karabakh peace process, we are trying to use all chances for peaceful
resolution. At the same time, we are stregthening our country,
economy and defense. Today, our economy is 6 times bigger than that
of Armenia, next year, it will be 10 times bigger. Naturally this will
give us increasingly favorable conditions for resolving the problem,”
says Aliyev. “In economy Armenia is not rival to us. In military
Azerbaijan has the strongest army in the Caucasus and continues to
strengthen it due to yearly growing military allocations,” says Aliev.
“When all our energy and economic projects are launched, we will
become a strong state, and Armenia will not be able to rival with us.
So, they must understand that their policy may have fatal consequences
for them and that the population of Karabakh and Armenia may face a
serious danger unless the Karabakh conflict is resolved by peace,”
says Aliev.
He blames Armenia for regularly wrecking the peace talks. He says
that the present format of the talks is the Prague Process – stage
by stage scenario: “withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied
territories, discussion of the status of Karabakh and enhancement of
security.” “In fact, this is the final stage and if it is wrecked,
there will be no more chance for further talks. But if the talks
are stopped, we will not just sit by and wait for something. We
are either in the negotiating process our outside it. And if we are
outside, we will give up all our obligations, change our strategy
and consider other solutions,” says Aliyev. He notes that Azerbaijan
will not obligatorily start military operation at once, it will be
the last step, but before it the country will use its huge economic,
financial and human potential for achieving its goal.
“Simply, they in Armenia must understand that the process is developing
to our advantage, and they cannot rival with us. So, for the sake of
the safety of the Armenian population of Karabakh and for the sake
of the safety of the population of Armenia, they must voluntarily
withdraw their troops from our occupied territories,” says Aliyev.

ARMENIA RANKS 4TH IN FIDE RATING LIST
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 17 2006
President Robert Kocharyan received today Chairman of the World Chess
Federation, the President of Kalmykia Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, who arrived
in Armenia to participate in the under 20 World Chess Championship.
FIDE President welcomed the efforts of Armenian authorities directed
at the development of chess in Armenia, saying that “when there is
serious attention, there is result and the success of Armenian chess
players is a good evidence of this.” IN his words, Armenia ranks 4th
among 165 countries in FIDE rating list.
President Kocharyan said that the recent numerous victories of Armenian
chess players have become inspiring examples for many and the interest
in chess has grown.
The interlocutors exchanged views on the prospects of further
development of chess in our country, and teaching chess in schools.
They turned to the possible collaboration between Armenia and
Kalmykia. Noting that our country has a good experience of cooperation
with Southern regions of Russia, Robert Kocharyan said it is necessary
to combine the economic potential of the countries and clarify the
directions of cooperation.

RYZHKOV: “HOW CAN WE PUNISH ARMENIANS, WHEN WE LIVE BESIDE THEM?”
PanARMENIAN.Net
17.10.2006 17:02 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Russia’s actions regarding Georgia are not
aimed against Armenia, Co-Chair of Armenian-Russian Commission on
Interparliamentary Cooperation Nikolay Ryzhkov stated in Yerevan. “We
never thought to punish our friends. How can we punish Armenians,
when we live beside them? Moreover given 2 million Armenians living
in Russia,” he said.
Ryzhkov is sure that Russia’s political leaders did not have thoughts
like that, excellent relations between leaders, parliaments and
governments of the two countries are established. “Another matter is
that taking into account the transport communication between Georgia
and Armenia, today’s situation has indirectly influenced Armenia,
however, as far as I know, there is an agreement, according to
which cargo may pass through the territory of Georgia to Armenia,”
he remarked, reports Novosti-Armenia.

“WE MUST DEBATE 1915 OURSELVES”
Tolga Korkut
BÝA, Turkey
Oct 16 2006
“Genocide Denial Law” will neither serve to resolve incidents in 1915
nor benefit Armenians in Turkey says minorities law expert attorney
Cetin. “Turkey should come to the level where it can solve its problems
itself” believes EU specialist Dr. Aktar.
BÝA (Istanbul) – Minority Law expert, attorney Fethiye Cetin has
said the French Parliament’s passing of the bill on the denial of
an Armenian genocide will neither serve to resolve what happened in
1915 in Turkey under Ottoman rule not benefit the Armenian community
in today’s Turkey.
“Just the opposite”, she said, “as we have seen in the past it will
inflict harm. Because the nationalist circles in Turkey use such
bills and decisions as an excuse and increase the repression and
expression of resentment of Armenians. Unfortunately we hear such
expression from official mouths”.
Cetin, also the author of the Turkish book Anneannem (My Grandmother)
based on the true story of her maternal grandparent being converted to
Turkish Islam in the broader concept of Christians and Armenians later
becoming Turks and Muslims, believes it is wrong to “turn such grief
in history into material for political purposes” and that Armenian,
Turkish and French intellectuals need to work together to preempt
the goals of this latest legislation and similar other.
“Turkey should do the same thing” she said. “Intellectuals should
preempt all legislation that can block mutual discussion, dialogue,
refreshing of memory and empathy”.
According to Cetin Turkey needs to come to the point where it can
solve the problem itself and that the only way forward for this is
to conduct work based on refreshing of memories and empathy.
“Unless we solve this problem ourselves, it is tying up Turkey’s
feet. It is being turned into material of political benefit to some
parliaments. This is very painful. Turkey should as a priority solve
the problem and should get rid of these things that tie her down.”
Cetin says a solution to the problem related to what the Ottoman
Armenians encountered in 1915 is based on two things:
Memory revival: “We need to work on memory based on mutual dialogue
in Turkey”.
Developing empathy: “We have an empathy problem in the society. We
need to be able to see and feel the grief of others for real outside
of the bounds of all political conflicts and nationalist prejudice.
We need to be able to listen to each other’s grief, see it and feel
it. Such initiatives have started and it has been seen they have very
positive effects. People have started to isten to the grief of each
other. The path should be opened for this.”
Cetin believed that what happened in 1915 “is sensitive and painful,
requiring a priority solution” but that the sharing of memories on
mutual dialogue and developing empathy between the communities is an
essential part of that solution.
“If we look at the law adopted at the French Parliament” she adds, “it
can be seen this serves neither memory work nor developing empathy”.
Aktar: We need to debate the massacre
Bahcesehir University European Union Center President Dr. Cengiz
Aktar also believes that France took a mistaken decision which he
describes as being “foolish”.
In an interview with the Turkish NTV television on the issue, Aktar
said that rather than allow third parties to take over the issue “we
must talk ourselves that there was not a genocide but that there was
a serious massacre. If this happens, we will not leave the discussion
up to lawmakers at the French Parliament”.
Aktar believes it would be a mistake to regard the issue only in the
context of Franco-Turkish relations or give impulsive reactions. He
says the Turkish government can overcome this period.
“In France there has been no debate that Turkey would be further
excluded or that it would be excluded from the EU process. But if
we give a response in the same way, it will mean a continuation of
a no-solution” he said.
Noting that there could be economic reaction to the decision, Aktar
recalled French capital had over 5 billion euro in investments in
Turkey and said “it would be mistaken for us to touch the industry”.
–Boundary_(ID_Kl1Bo1xGHREK6O/pRc eS3A)–

FRENCH PRESIDENT SORRY OVER ADOPTION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE BILL
Xinhua General News Service
October 15, 2006 Sunday 6:00 AM EST
French President Jacques Chirac expressed his regret over adoption of a
bill that would make it a crime to deny the alleged Armenian genocide,
Turkey’s semi- official Anatolia news agency reported on Sunday.
Chirac made the regret on Saturday evening over a telephone call
to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, saying that he was
sorry over the adoption of the Armenian genocide bill in the French
National Assembly.
“I am very sorry over the initiative of the French National Assembly.
I understand your feelings and furthermore I share them, ” Chirac
was quoted as saying.
The report said that Chirac noted this was a development pertaining
to the upcoming general elections in France, vowing that he would do
his best to prevent the bill to become a law.
The French president said the adoption of the bill would not affect
Turkey’s negotiations with the European Union (EU), reiterating his
support to Turkey’s EU process.
Erdogan, for his part, briefed Chirac the indignation of the Turkish
people and his government, underscoring that the bill contradicted
freedom of speech principle in the French constitution.
On Thursday, the French National Assembly adopted a bill calling for
up to a year in prison and fines of up to 56,000 U.S. dollars for
anyone who denies the Armenian genocide in the early 20th century.
The bill must be passed by the Senate and signed by French President
Jacques Chirac. However, business and consumer groups in Turkey have
threatened to boycott French products.
Turkey, which is facing increasing pressure from the EU to fully
acknowledge the killings, has always denied that up to 1.5 million
Armenians were subjected to genocide.
But Turkey does acknowledge that up to 300,000 Armenians died during
fighting and efforts to relocate populations away from the war zone
in eastern Turkey.

TURKISH GENERAL STAFF SAYS SHOTS FIRED ON BORDER TROOPS FROM ARMENIA
Anatolia news agency, Turkey
Oct 13 2006
Ankara, 13 October: “Turkish soldiers came under harassing fire from
Armenian territories on the Turkey-Armenia border on 11 October 2006,”
the Turkish General Staff said on Friday [13 October].
According to the General Staff, two shots were fired on Turkish
soldiers from Armenia.
Turkish General Staff has informed the Turkish Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and asked it to take appropriate action on the border incident.
There were no casualties or property damage due to the harassing fire
from Armenia.

WHAT CAUSED A CENTURY OF WAR?
By Edward Cuddihy – News Book Reviewer
Buffalo News, NY
Oct 15 2006
Nonfiction
At the dawn of the 20th century, the West enjoyed an economic and
social prosperity unequaled in 1,600 or 1,700 years. The industrial
revolution had fueled an economic powerhouse; empirical nationalism
had led to worldwide European domination. Western religions had long
ago learned to live in relative harmony, and the peoples of the West
had carved out their own megastates, often along ethnic lines. The
people of the European peninsula appeared on the verge of unimagined
greatness.
What followed was a century of barbaric bloodletting which began
as localized fratricide and mushroomed into an orgy of worldwide
indiscriminate killing. This debacle reached a pinnacle of madness
just before the midpoint of the century and then continued to bubble
on in a series of lethal aftershocks nearly to the century’s close,
leaving the West fragmented, economically emaciated and decidedly on
the descent.
This is the way best-selling author and historian Niall Ferguson
sees the 20th century as he attempts in his latest book to answer
the question: Why did such a thing happen?
Keep in mind that Ferguson is Tory to his roots, and despite ties to
Harvard and Stanford universities, he views the world from the banks
of the Thames. So to him, the capital and center of the West is London.
This massive work is the latest in Ferguson’s string of six volumes,
and perhaps represents his most ambitious work to date. And he’s still
in his mid-40s. In this volume, he attempts the task of analyzing
the events of the past 100 years in the context of the struggle to
dominate the West, and thus, the world.
As he did in earlier volumes, especially in “The Pity of War,” and
“The Cash Nexus,” Ferguson takes pleasure in debunking the rock-solid
premises of modern historians. And this debunking, often controversial
and sometimes politically incorrect, is backed by mountains of research
and copious statistics.
You can’t argue with his facts, though you might have misgivings about
some of his interpretations, because, as you know, facts seldom if
ever speak for themselves.
A sampling of his premises:
~U The Holocaust, as horrific and inexcusable as it was, was one of
a series of racial wars perpetrated throughout the world. He cites
as being racially motivated Stalin’s purges, Mao’s civil war, the
Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks and the Japanese mass
murder of its mainland neighbors.
~U Hitler’s decision to attack the Soviets was an attack on “Jewish
Bolshevism,” a threat to the Third Reich.
~U He questions whether Adolf Schicklgruber, known to the world
as Hitler, or Iosif Dzhugashvili, better known as Stalin, was the
greater threat to humankind. On an objective scale of atrocities,
he awards a clear advantage to Stalin, describing Hitler as a “kind
of apprentice.” Yet, it is Stalin who is seen smiling like a cat
with Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt in 1940s newsreels,
while Hitler stood for all that is evil.
~U Ferguson continues to develop his theme from his earlier “The Pity
of War” that the British entry into World War I was a mistake of the
greatest magnitude. This was not a war of good versus evil. It was
a natural fallout of the disintegration of the Habsburg, Romanov,
Hohenzollern and Ottoman empires.
~U Appeasement didn’t lead to war. World War II began in 1937
with Japan’s invasion of China. War, he claims, led to attempts
at appeasement.
Some other Ferguson observations, accompanied by massive bodies of
fact, are that Russian, British and U.S. atrocities were on a par with
Germany’s and Japan’s, especially in the indiscriminate fire bombings
of civilian cities. Yet, the ultimate bomb, as atrocious as it might
appear 60 years later, was no more than the natural development of the
science of industrialized warfare, and in fact might be seen as “poetic
justice,” an achievement of Jewish scientists, refugees from the Nazis.
And if you think JFK stared down Nikita Khrushchev over Cuba, Ferguson
would disagree, claiming that both men swerved at the last moment in
an international game of chicken. Most of these concepts have surfaced
before. The value of this work is in its clear presentation of an
overwhelming body of facts to back up each assertion. This volume
contains vivid details of atrocities that will be thought-provoking
and sad reminders of man’s treatment of his fellow man. But don’t
look for battles or war heroes. Ferguson treats with the national
psychology and big-picture strategy of the war of the century, not
the invasions or triumphs of one military machine over another.
In fact, if you aren’t familiar with the military history of the
world wars and the ensuing Cold War, Ferguson will leave you lost.
This is a major work. It might tail off in the last quarter of the
century, hinting that the task Ferguson set up for himself was near
impossible – to analyze in great detail the bloodiest century in the
history of mankind. And the Cold War, a mere 50 pages in this 800-page
work, will likely be revisited in another Ferguson book.
This body of modern history, now well over 4,000 pages from the pen
of the prolific Niall Ferguson, just continues to grow in volume and
in depth.
Edward Cuddihy is a former News managing editor.

The Irish Times
October 13, 2006 Friday
Armenian dissident sees a threat to free speech
by Nicholas Birch in Istanbul
Turkey: Hrant Dink knows all about freedom of speech and the lack of
it.
An Armenian Turk who edits the bilingual Istanbul-based weekly Agos,
he is the only person to have been convicted so far under a notorious
law that has been used to bring Nobel prize-winner Orhan Pamuk and
dozens of others to trial.
With a six-month suspended sentence under his belt for “insulting
Turkishness”, Dink now faces up to three years’ prison under the same
law for describing the deaths of at least 600,000 Armenians in 1915
as “genocide”. Not that that has stopped him criticising the French
parliament’s vote yesterday morning to make denying genocide a
punishable offence.
“If this law passes through the senate, I will go to France and say
that there was no genocide, even if it pains me to say so,” he said.
“There is no difference in mentality between the Turkish and French
laws. Let French and Turkish justice compete to see which of them can
judge me faster.”
Like other liberals here, Dink sees both pieces of legislation as
flagrant breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights, which
argues that freedom of speech can only be limited if national
security, territorial integrity or public safety is under threat.
But his greatest concern is that this slew of legislation and
counter-legislation will stifle the rapidly growing debate in Turkey
on the reality of 1915.
The biggest taboo in a country political analyst Fuat Keyman
describes as “founded on historical amnesia”, the Armenian genocide
is the subject of an increasing number of books, exhibitions and
academic conferences. “Beneath the bluster, the Turkish
establishment’s position is crumbling,” says Halil Berktay, referring
to the state’s insistence that Armenians were the victims of a civil
war that killed more Muslims.
A historian at Istanbul’s Sabanci University, Berktay was the target
of months of death threats in 2000 when he became the first Turkish
historian publicly to describe 1915 as a genocide.
He doesn’t like using the word, though. “Turks are furious when you
use it, Armenians when you don’t”, he said. “What is needed is to
find common ground, but the climate of polarisation makes that near
impossible.”
For him, the meddling of any parliament in the matter is “no better
than those Turkish policemen who used to raid tourist hotels at night
to check couples were married.”
The author of a powerfully moving 2005 memoir of her grandmother, who
told her late in her life that she was an Armenian who converted to
Islam in 1915, Istanbul lawyer Fethiye Cetin agrees: “These debates
over terminology and statistics are barren,”, she says. “They hide
the lives and deaths of individuals and do nothing to encourage
people to listen.”