Author: Khondkarian Raffi

The Record, NJ
Nov. 2, 2004

U.S. says drug cash was good at car lot

By TOM TRONCONE
STAFF WRITER

Zakar Motors looks like most of the used car lots that line Route 46
from South Hackensack to Little Ferry: Small paved lot. Tiny business
office. Dozens of cars.

But there was a difference, federal authorities say: The father-and-son
shop catered to drug dealers with a penchant for luxury cars.

Early Monday, drug agents arrested the owner of the Little Ferry
dealership, Zakar A. Civan, 58, of Fort Lee; his son, Raffi Civan, 37,
of Englewood Cliffs; and their secretary, Eudelys Manzueta, 30, of
Moonachie, on money laundering charges.

U.S. marshals seized close to $1 million in luxury vehicles, including
a $130,000 Ferrari 360 Modena and a stable of Porsches, Mercedes-Benzes
and BMWs.

“They knowingly and willfully violated federal money laundering
statutes,” said Michael Pasterchick Jr., special agent in charge of the
New Jersey office of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.
“These guys were well-known in the drug community.”

Zakar Motors allowed drug dealers to pay for the luxury cars with cash
by illegally creating financing and other paperwork in the names of
bogus buyers, Pasterchick said. From January 2002 through July 2004,
the dealership sold $3 million in luxury vehicles, with more than $2
million of the money paid in cash, he said.

A DEA database flagged 20 percent of those buyers as having previous
drug arrests.

Civan family members disputed the DEA’s claims.

“All I know is that my brother has always done everything by the book,”
Tony Civan said of Zakar Civan as he waited to talk to federal drug
agents outside the lot’s fenced perimeter.

Agents from the DEA’s High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area task force
opened their investigation into the dealership in March 2003, based on
information from a confidential informant, as well as a series of what
they deemed suspicious IRS documents, Pasterchick said.

An undercover investigator negotiated the cash purchase of four
vehicles from the Civans, three of which the agent claimed he would
sell back to them a month later as a way of laundering his money, he
said. The agent then surreptitiously recorded a conversation in
Armenian between the father and son, during which the son told the
father, “[The buyer] wants to launder money,” Pasterchick said.

In August, a drug dealer-turned-informant who was arrested in a
Monmouth County sweep told investigators he purchased a $70,000
Mercedes-Benz from Zakar in May because “the dealership had a
reputation within the drug community as a place that was willing to
sell cars with no questions asked as to the source of the funds,”
according to the criminal complaint filed against the trio.

The Neptune drug dealer told investigators he gave Manzueta, the
secretary, a plastic bag with $9,000 as a down payment for the car and
that it had to be registered in the name of a fake purchaser, the
complaint says. It says he then made $5,000 and $10,000 installment
payments in the next few weeks and provided Zakar Motors with the names
of prospective “buyers” before settling on the appropriate stand-in
purchaser.

Later that month, two undercover agents bought a 2001 BMW 330ci from
Zakar Motors for $30,000, telling the dealership that the buyer’s name
could not appear on any paperwork and that they “had a lot of product
on the street,” the federal complaint alleges.

“We made sure that these people were going to put cars in other names
and we told them that the money was drug proceeds and that we need
concealed [compartments] in the car,” Pasterchick said. “It’s very
unusual in today’s business world to work with bags of cash.”

Besides the cars, DEA agents seized $70,000 from a bank account and
could seek the forfeiture of Civan’s homes in Fort Lee and Forked River
in Ocean County, Pasterchick said. The agents had to let several other
high-priced vehicles remain -among them, a $250,000 Bentley Azure and a
$180,000 Ferrari -because they were on consignment from another car
dealer, he said.

On Monday morning, investigators from the DEA, IRS, state police and
Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office sifted through paperwork in two small
offices on the lot, occasionally removing brown cardboard boxes marked
“DEA evidence.”

Bill Offord, the assistant special agent in charge of the criminal
division of the IRS in New Jersey, said the agency’s goal now would be
the possible prosecution of some of the cash buyers.

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 1, 2004, Monday

TBILISI HAS CLOSED THE BORDER FOR RUSSIAN DRAFTEES[]

SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, October 29, 2004, p. 5

by Yury Simonyan

Around 400 Russian servicemen currently wait for Georgian visas in the
Armenian city of Gyumri. They must be sent to the 62nd military base in
Akhalkalaki. The command of the Russian group of forces in the
Trans-Caucasian region has repeatedly asked the Georgian Foreign
Ministry to speed up the process of issuing visas to the Russian
servicemen. Colonel Vladimir Kuparadze, deputy commander of the Russian
group of forces in the Trans-Caucasian region, said that the delay is
caused by formalism of the Georgian Foreign Ministry, which
scrupulously verified the list and the actual number of draftees.
Colonel Kuparadze said: “The Georgian Foreign Ministry’s hesitation is
caused by the fact that we intend to completely deploy the military
base. We previously lacked servicemen at the base, and intend to send
more soldiers to Georgia. At the same time, we do not violate the
agreements with the Georgian leadership. We have submitted all
documents required for issuing visas to the Georgian leadership. This
is a scheduled rotation of Russian servicemen. Our soldiers wait for a
permit to enter Georgia in Gyumri.”

The Georgian Foreign Ministry party confirmed the information announced
by the Russian group of forces. The Foreign Ministry stated: “We are
verifying the compliance of the documents submitted by the Russian
military with the agreements signed by the Georgian leadership.” At the
same time, the source in the Georgian ministry did not say when the
problem will be resolved. He noted that this procedure takes much time:
“This is routine, which takes time. However, we have already issued
some visas to Russian servicemen.”

In the meantime, the Georgian Defense Ministry intends to replace its
peacekeeping contingent in the zone of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict.
Georgia reported its intention to Major-General Marat Kulakhmetov,
commander of the peacekeeping force. It should be noted that the staff
of the peacekeeping force does not object against Georgia’s intention.
The Russian general said: “We do not protest despite the fact that
rotation must take place once every six months. The rotation of the
Russian and Ossetian battalions will take place according to the
schedule.”

However, Tskhinvali’s opinion regarding the impending (fifth) rotation
of the Georgian peacekeeping contingent is somewhat different. Boris
Chochiyev, co-chairman of the joint monitoring commission (South
Ossetia), stated: “We are sure that such frequent rotations of
peacekeeping contingents are part of a reconnaissance operation on the
eve of aggression against South Ossetia. Over 2,000 Georgian servicemen
have already examined this theater of war as a result of a range of
rotations.”

Translated by Alexander Dubovoi

A1 Plus | 13:56:13 | 01-11-2004 | Politics |

ARMENIAN MP’s TRIP TO UKRAINE CANCELED

Armenian National Assembly member Shavarsh Kocharyan was to take part in
Ukraine’s presidential elections held Sunday as an observer. However, at
the last moment, when a flight reservation had already been made, he was
told about his business trip cancellation by the parliament
administration “because of lack of money”.

Shavarsh Kocharyan is explaining this otherwise. He says he would speak
about ballot fraud and other election irregularities prompting not only
Armenian authorities’ utter displeasure but also Russian president
Vladimir Putin’s.

MEETING WITH AAA DELEGATION

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
22 Oct 04

On October 19 NKR president Arkady Ghukassian met with the delegation
of the Armenian Assembly of America headed by the vice chair of the
board of directors of the organization Annie Totah. The regional
director of the AAA offices in Armenia and Nagorni Karabakh Arpy
Vardanian was also included in the delegation. The already traditional
visits of the AAA delegations to Nagorni Karabakh aim to get
acquainted with the programs launched by their direct assistance, as
well as to observe the prospects of further assistance to the
settlement of social, economic, educational and other programs that
the government of the republic faces. During the meeting with the
president the members of the delegation, most of them in Karabakh for
the first time, shared impressions from their first visit. Besides
Stepanakert they went to several villages of the republic and observed
significant progress in all the spheres of life in Nagorni Karabakh
and appreciated the efforts of the government directed at removing the
consequences of the war and restoring the ruined economy and
infrastructures. At the same time the members of the Assembly
mentioned that if practically there are no more traces of war in
Stepanakert, in the regions of the republic there are still a lot of
problems to be solved. In this reference they expressed readiness to
use the potential of their organization for further development of
Artsakh. The members of the delegation touched upon the problem of
restoration of the town of Shushi as well. Arkady Ghukassian mentioned
that the government has taken certain steps in this direction,
programs are worked out to re-create the town as an educational,
cultural and resort center. However, according to the president of
NKR, Nagorni Karabakh is not able to solve the problem alone, and it
is necessary to bring together the efforts of the entire Armenian
Diaspora. The president of NKR spoke about the current situation in
the process of settlement of the Karabakh conflict and the prospects
and pointed out the necessity of restoring the real negotiation format
within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group, where Nagorni Karabakh
will be an equal party. According to the president, only in this case
will it be possible to achieve a constructive solution of the
problem. At the end of the meeting the NKR president thanked the
members of the Armenian Assembly of America for their active lobbing
owing to which the government of the USA provides humanitarian aid to
Nagorni Karabakh. According to Arkady Ghukassian, the USA is the only
country which officially aids Karabakh, and the programs funded by
this country help to improve the quality of life of the population of
the republic. Emphasizing the importance of implementing different
humanitarian programs in Artsakh by the AAA, the president of the
republic appealed to the representatives of the Assembly to establish
mutually profitable cooperation in Artsakh, especially that recently
considerable potential has been accumulated in this sphere in Nagorni
Karabakh.

AA.
22-10-2004

Le Monde, France
22 octobre 2004

Le «non» serait une colossale erreur
HORIZONS DEBATS

par Luc Ferry

PARMI toutes les raisons de se prononcer en faveur d’une adhésion de
la Turquie à l’Europe, l’une au moins ne laisse personne tout à fait
insensible : parmi les grandes nations, seule la Turquie est en
position de faire valoir à la face du monde qu’on peut être un pays
laïque, démocratique et cependant musulman. Nul autre, en effet,
n’est au même degré susceptible de faire passer aujourd’hui, et plus
encore demain, un tel message. Si nous intégrons la Turquie, ce qui
suppose bien entendu qu’elle remplisse les critères requis, la chose
sera pour ainsi dire prouvée par le fait. Si nous la rejetons, c’est
la preuve du contraire que nous aurons nous-mêmes administrée. Il n’y
a là nul chantage, mais un simple constat qu’on ne saurait écarter
d’un revers de main.

Prétendre qu’on peut envisager une troisième voie entre le « oui » et
le « non » – un partenariat privilégié – est sans doute tentant. Cela
en arrangerait plus d’un, mais c’est à l’évidence se rassurer à bon
compte. Une telle proposition eût été sans doute envisageable il y a
vingt ans encore, peut-être même en l999, mais elle est désormais
totalement irréaliste au regard des promesses unanimes et formelles
qui ont été faites et répétées. Qu’on s’en réjouisse ou qu’on le
regrette n’a à cet égard aucune importance. C’est désormais un fait
historique, et nul ne peut s’en affranchir d’un coup de baguette
magique. La politique n’est pas un jeu où l’on pourrait refaire la
partie. Elle est fille de l’histoire, et ses responsables doivent
savoir que le temps n’y est pas réversible à volonté.

Vus d’Istanbul, nos débats provoquent donc d’ores et déjà de
terribles dégts. Peut-on y être indifférent ? Ne comprend-on pas que
nos « amis » atlantistes en profitent pour distiller à jet continu un
discours dévastateur dont la teneur est à peu près la suivante : «
Vous croyez que les Français vous aiment parce qu’ils se sont opposés
aux Américains sur l’Irak. Détrompez-vous : ils sont guidés par la
lcheté, l’égoïsme et le mépris. Voyez la loi sur le voile, voyez
leur attitude envers la Turquie… »

Tout cela est sans doute faux. Ce n’en est pas moins désastreux, et
un politique responsable ne peut pas ne pas en tenir compte. J’en
déduis qu’il faut, pour provoquer en conscience de tels ravages,
avoir d’excellentes et impérieuses raisons. Or à examiner de près
celles qu’on avance jusqu’alors dans le débat public, force est de
constater qu’elles naviguent en permanence entre l’inavouable et
l’incohérent.

Contre l’entrée de la Turquie, on invoque, en effet, deux types
d’arguments. Les uns sont liés à la nature réelle ou supposée du pays
candidat, les autres à la conception de l’Europe qu’on veut
aujourd’hui privilégier.

Dans le premier cas, on invoque, dans le désordre : la torture, les
droits des femmes, la religion, la non-reconnaissance du génocide
arménien, la situation économique, démographique, voire, pour les
moins regardants, une prétendue « barrière culturelle ». La liste
n’est pas limitative, mais, par définition même, aucune de ces
objections, sauf à flirter ouvertement avec une forme de racisme que
tous rejettent, n’est a priori insurmontable. Le processus d’adhésion
prendra des années, et le laps de temps prévu pour négocier est
destiné à permettre d’apporter une solution à de tels obstacles.

C’est d’ailleurs la raison pour laquelle à l’UDF, où se situent les
principaux adversaires de la candidature turque, on tente de faire
valoir une argumentation d’une tout autre portée. Quand bien même
elle remplirait tous les critères exigés officiellement par l’Union
européenne, il faudrait selon eux continuer de s’opposer à son
entrée, inacceptable par essence, « car ce n’est pas une question
turque qui nous est posée, mais une question européenne ». Passons
sur le caractère incohérent du propos : à l’évidence, s’il n’y avait
rien dans la question turque en tant que telle qui fasse obstacle, on
voit mal pourquoi on devrait s’y opposer. Au reste, immédiatement
après avoir mis en place ce rideau de fumée, les leaders de l’UDF, à
commencer par François Bayrou, se lancent dans l’énumération,
désormais rituelle, des données géographiques, historiques,
sociologiques – voire « anthropologiques » (sic !) – qui font, à
leurs yeux, de la Turquie un élément « indigeste » pour l’UE.

La raison avancée est officiellement la suivante : l’Europe ne
saurait se borner à être un espace commercial régi par des règles
démocratiques, mais il faut qu’elle devienne une entité suffisamment
homogène sur le plan culturel et historique pour accéder enfin au
statut de puissance politique qui lui permettrait de discuter d’égal
à égal avec la Chine ou les Etats-Unis.

Qu’on puisse attendre de l’Europe davantage qu’une zone de
libre-échange est tout à fait compréhensible et respectable. Que l’on
fasse reposer cette exigence légitime sur le postulat d’une identité
culturelle et historique commune constitue cependant une erreur
colossale, tout à la fois sur la Turquie et sur l’Europe. Sur la
Turquie parce que l’affirmation selon laquelle elle serait
culturellement incompatible avec la conception française du projet
européen est tout simplement fausse et inacceptable. Sur ce point, il
faut reconnaître que Jacques Chirac, fidèle à la tradition gaulliste,
a de toute évidence raison. On pourrait d’ailleurs plaider avec plus
de raisons que la culture la plus « différente », sinon la plus
opposée à celle de la France est sans doute la culture allemande.
Presque tout nous sépare ou nous distingue, y compris la langue
jusque dans ses plis et replis les plus singuliers. Cela ne nous
empêche en rien, tout au contraire, et c’est cela la grandeur du
projet et la force du couple franco-allemand, de partager un idéal
commun. Justement parce qu’il n’est pas enraciné dans une identité
culturelle.

Concevoir l’Europe sur le modèle américain comme une « grosse nation
», comme un Etat fédéral qui posséderait une identité culturelle
homogène, bref, comme un communautarisme élargi, c’est ne rien
comprendre à ce qui fut et doit rester l’essence même de la
construction européenne. Cette dernière est, au meilleur sens du
terme, un « artifice ». Elle vise, en s’inspirant de l’idéal
anticommunautariste des droits de l’homme, tout à la fois au respect
absolu des identités nationales et à leur dépassement radical dans un
projet politique et constitutionnel résolument volontariste. Plaider
pour une culture commune qui exclurait la Turquie, c’est donc plaider
pour une conception nationaliste, identitaire et communautariste de
l’Europe qui contredit tout ce que ses principes fondamentaux ont de
plus élevé. Le fait que des responsables censés incarner l’idéal
européen puissent commettre une telle bévue en dit long sur leurs
arrière-pensées politiciennes. Gageons que l’opinion publique, une
fois éclairée, saura les faire revenir à la raison.

NOTES: luc ferry, ancien ministre de la jeunesse, de l’éducation
nationale et de la recherche, est membre du Conseil économique et
social ; il anime le Conseil d’analyse de la société, créé auprès du
premier ministre ; il collabore à la chaîne LCI.

OSKANIAN MAKES DISCORDANT STATEMENTS

Azg/am
22 Oct 04

Foreign minister Vartan Oskanian is making discordant statements these
days about Turkey’s possible membership in EU, Armenia’s blockade and
Armenian-Turkish relations.

“There are no diplomatic relations between Armenian and Turkey today,
and the border is closed putting Armenia in a tough situation”,
ITAR-TASS quoted Vartan Oskanian as saying this in Rome on
October19. Oskanian noted at the round table called “South Caucasus:
Stability and Safety” organized by the Italian I nstitute of Foreign
Affairs and the Armenian embassy to Italy that Turkey’s integration to
EU will open a new door for Yerevan-Ankara relations.

The CNN-Turk touched on Oskanian’s speech. “We wish that the
Armenian-Turkish border-gate opened. The fact that we have no
border-gate with Turkey and Azerbaijan causes lot of troubles. Armenia
is a European state by its spirit and is taking important steps to
reach European standards. Turkey’s membership to EU will bring
Europe’s borders closer to Armenia. Acknowledgment ofthe Armenian
Genocide is not a precondition for starting talks with Ankara”,
Oskanian said.

A press release spread by Foreign Ministry’s press center reads: “The
minister touched on Turkey’s membership to EU and presented Armenia’s
position on the issue”. But the press release keeps silent about
Oskanian’s speech. That’s why we turned to ITAR-TASS and CNN-Turk for
details.

Minister Oskanian’s words uttered in Rome do not correspond with his
statement at a press conference a month ago that Armenia’s economy
will develop without either oil or gas pipelines and even in a
blockade.

Vartan Oskanian certainly new the audience before which he was
standing but Armenian officials’ statements very often contain
contradiction especially in case of Armenia-Turkish relations.

Oskanian declares Turkey’s integration to EU as beneficial for
Armenian-Turkish relations in Rome whereas in Yerevan, October 11, he
stated that Turkey is unworthy of EU admittance talks. “A country that
has blockaded Armenia and has recently passed a law making the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide, as well as any claim to withdraw
Turkish forces from Cyprus, a criminal act isnot worthy even the
negotiations for EU accession. We think that Turkey is not ready for
that”, Oskanian said.

Defense Minister Serge Sargsian in his turn told Marko Zakera, deputy
chairman of East European Union, that Armenia considers Turkey’s
membership in EU favorable.

As opposed to Yerevan, Ankara hews to its chosen line in relations
with Armenia. This is a policy of blockade and threats.

It seems that Armenia also has a straightforward Turkish policy: not
to put forward preconditions for starting diplomatic relations. But
Armenian officials become shaky when it comes up to Turkey’s
admittance to the EU. Europe in its turn considers the “Armenian
factor” a trifling issue. Europe is not going to ask Armenia or
Diaspora whether to admit Turkey or not. The “Armenian factor” may
become a subject of bargain at best.

By Tatoul Hakobian

USA spends over 12m dollars on Azeri mine clearance in six years – agency

Bilik Dunyasi news agency
21 Oct 04

BAKU

The US State Department has published a report on its expenditure for
mine clearance in different countries. The document says that the USA
has spent 12.7m dollars on the mine clearance work in Azerbaijan over
the past six years, of which 2.4m dollars has been allocated over the
past year alone.

All in all, Washington has allotted 30.4m dollars to the former USSR
republics since 1998. As part of the programme, Armenia has received
9.3m dollars, Estonia 2.6m dollars and Georgia 5.8m dollars.

This year, the bulk of the funds allocated for the mine clearance work
was channelled into Iraq.

Dar al-Hayat, Saudi Arabia
Oct 20 2004

Ayoon wa Azan (Trying the Neo-Cons)
Jihad Al Khazen Al-Hayat 2004/10/20

I demand that the neo-conservatives who worked for the war on Iraq,
and deliberately planned for its destruction and not only for the
ousting of Saddam Hussein, be tried before of the international war
crimes tribunal in Lahaye.

These criminals deserve to be the only prisoners at Guantanamo Bay;
however, I fear that if they go there, they would be subject to the
same torture that the Arab and Muslim prisoners went through. This is
why I prefer that they be tried in a decent court, in order for them
to respond to the accusation of deliberately killing more than 1,000
Americans, some 20,000 Iraqis, and the destruction of the
infrastructure of 25 million Iraqis.

I continue with brief comments on the news I followed these past two
days:

– The people surrounding Prime Minister Tony Blair denied that the
objective behind sending the British troops from Southern Iraq to
Baghdad is to help George Bush in the American presidential
elections.

This denial means that the accusation is correct, as the political
news is confirmed when it is denied, especially if the denial comes
from people renowned for their lies.

The British denial reminded me of the day when Secretary of State
Colin Powell denied the fact that the neo-cons are controlling the
American foreign policy; I have repeatedly wrote about this
non-elected Israeli mob, and did not find anything at the end of the
day that proved my words better than Powell’s denial of the existence
of this cabal.

– Would the reader have noticed the difference if Al-Jazeera and
Al-Arabiya televisions broadcast the scenes of the air raid
destruction in Fallujah, and said that these are Israeli attacks on
the Gaza Strip, or if they broadcast scenes of destruction from the
Gaza Strip and claimed that they are the product of American raids on
Fallujah?

There is no difference; both crimes are perpetrated with American
fighter jets and American money.

Nevertheless, there is a difference, which is the most important; I
support the attacks against the terrorists in Iraq, and the
destruction of Zarkawi’s network, if he or the network exist;
however, this does not happen through air raids, which kill innocent
people from Palestine to Iraq.

– The most hideous lie that has been repeated since 9/11, is Israel’s
claim that the United States and itself are facing the same
terrorism, and that America, after the terrorism it has been subject
to, understands what Israel is going through.

This is a hideous accusation against innocent Americans, as they were
monstrously killed inside their offices, without having occupied the
lands of others or threatened them. As for Israel, it is an occupying
terrorist state that undertakes Nazi crimes against the Palestinians,
and then wants them not to response to its attacks.

I would like to say that there is no resemblance between the American
victims and the Israeli casualties, who die in a land they are
occupying by force, are killing its people, and destroying their
houses. If there is some kind of resemblance, it is between the
terrorism of Al Qaeda and the terrorism of Sharon’s government.

– I have a thousand objections to the American policy vis-à-vis
Palestine, Iraq, and all Arabs and Muslims. However, this is one
thing, and fighting terrorism is another. It is the duty of Arabs and
Muslims to help the U.S. in its war on terror, especially that the
terrorists are among us. The U.S. is more capable than any other
country to get into a war on terror, and win it.

– The ousting of Saddam Hussein is an accomplishment we owe to the
Americans; but was it necessary to pay its price with the lives of
thousands of Iraqis, and casualties in the Coalition forces, along
with a massive destruction, at a time when we should have witnessed
reconstruction?

This week, five churches were subject to terrorist bombings in
Baghdad; I read a report that said that 1,000 college female students
out of 3,000, stopped going to college because they were afraid of
being attacked by fundamentalists, which reject mixed educational
institutions.

Such incidents did not occur during the days of Saddam Hussein; I
used to think that the purpose behind ousting him is to build a
democratic regime that would be better for all Iraqis, including
minorities, women, and sects.

The Christian Armenian sect in Jerusalem is boiling, after a Jewish
student spit on a cross worn by a Priest during a Christian religious
ceremony. The student was banned from entering the Old City for 75
days after the accident; and it turned out that the Jewish students
spit on the Christians and insulted them while praying. Officials in
the Israeli government have acknowledged this phenomenon, and said it
is caused by the atmosphere of religious non-compassion that Israel
is experiencing.

– Abu Hamza Al Masri will be tried in Britain, after the U.S.
demanded that he be tried on its soil.

I did not know that stupidity is an accusation punished by law; the
crime of Abu Hamza is not terrorism, but stupidity. However,
stupidity is in every person, and it is not a crime or a felony. If
this preacher had any link to terrorism, he would have been more
cautious, and he would have uttered less statements that harm Muslims
before others.

Abu Hamza is stupid, and his followers are naïve; he does not deserve
all the commotion.

Does any of the readers know the American TV star Bill O’Reilly? He
presents a famous program on Fox News; however, he became really
famous lately, after a former Fox employee called Andrea Mackris
accused him of sexual harassment, and the details are interesting.

O’Reilly is part of the neo-con cabal; I was happy that he fell
morally after he fell politically. However, I think that Al Franklin
was happier than I was; he is the writer of Lies and the Lying Liars
Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, in which he
dedicated a whole chapter to exposing O’Reilly’s lies.

Everyone will fall. Those who will not fall because of sex scandals
like O’Reilly, will fall because of financial scandals like Richard
Perle. However, it seems that the scandals of spying for Israel,
which are the most important, were not enough to make them fall; as
some of the neo-cons spied for Israel and were subject to
investigation; I have already said that, and will not repeat myself
again.

ITAR-TASS News Agency
TASS
October 19, 2004 Tuesday 10:09 AM Eastern Time

Baku counts on Moscow in dealing with Karabakh problem

By Veronika Romanenkova

MOSCOW

Baku hopes that Moscow will help Azerbaijan achieve the settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.

“We are hoping Russia will continue to exert efforts (to bring about
a settlement over Nagorno-Karabakh) as our neighbor and co-chairman
of the OSCE Minsk Group,” President Ilham Aliyev said at a meeting in
the Kremlin with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Russian leader looked back on the recent meeting of the
presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

“I am certain that there will be a chance to discuss one of the worst
problems existing in the Caucasus, that of Nagorno-Karabakh, in a
calm situation,” he said.

“That you participated in the meeting with the Armenian president
makes on hopeful we shall be able to make progress,” Ilham Aliyev
said.

Earlier on Tuesday Putin said that Russia would continue active
peace-making and negotiating activities alongside Azerbaijan and
other CIS countries in eliminating the intricate bundle of
contradictions in the Caucasus.

“Our country is extremely interested in the peaceful and stable
development of this affluent region,” Putin said.

ASBAREZ ONLINE
TOP STORIES
10/19/2004
TO ACCESS PREVIOUS ASBAREZ ONLINE EDITIONS PLEASE VISIT OUR
WEBSITE AT <;HTTP://

1) Christofias Emphasizes Turkey’s Pre EU Need to Recognize Genocide
2) ARF Europe Decides to Step up Lobbying Prior to EC Meeting
3) Cyprus Lists Conditions for Turkey’s EU Bid
4) First European Armenian Convention Attracts Hundreds, Features Leading
European Union Experts
5) The Christian Presence in Jerusalem in Jeopardy Declared His Holiness
Aram I
6) Putin, Aliyev Discuss Karabagh

1) Christofias Emphasizes Turkey’s Pre EU Need to Recognize Genocide

YEREVAN (Armenpress/CNA)–The president of the House of Representatives of
Cyprus, Demetris Christofias, announced during a press conference in Armenia
that Turkey should fulfill specific criteria set forth by the European Union
before negotiations begin on its entry into the European body. Examples of
such
criteria, stressed Christofias, are Turkey’s recognition of the Armenian
genocide, as well as its recognition of all EU member states, including
Cyprus,
and its extension of EU customs union to Cyprus.
At a joint press conference, Armenia’s National Assembly President Arthur
Baghdasarian and his Cypriot counterpart Christofias reinforced their similar
views on issues of common concern, along with a full understanding of the
other’s positions.
Baghdasaryan said relations between Cyprus and Armenia must intensify, and
iterated Armenia’s support to Cyprus in its effort to settle its political
problem with Turkey.
Noting the similarity in the history of the two peoples, Christofias said,
“We
are victimized peoples who, through their struggle to survive, have
developed a
high sense of solidarity and love for the individual and of justice.”
The Cypriot parliamentary delegation, which began its a three-day visit to
Armenia on Tuesday, also met with President Robert Kocharian.
Among the issues discussed were their willingness to boost relations, and
concerns about Turkey’s drive to become an EU member before honoring its
assumed obligations.

2) ARF Europe Decides to Step up Lobbying Prior to EC Meeting

YEREVAN (Yerkir)–Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) representatives from
throughout Europe gathered in Brussels on October 17 for their regional
convention, which focused on critical political developments in the region.
Convention representatives from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France,
Greece, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, and the United Kingdom primarily
addressed the role of Europe’s Armenian community in influencing regional
politics with Turkey aspiring to join the European Union.
The ARF has been actively working to ensure that Turkey accession into the EU
be contingent on its fulfillment of a number of conditions.
The convention decided to step up lobbying efforts before the December 17
meeting of the European Council, which will finalize the date for Turkey’s EU
accession talks.
The delegates also pointed to the need for collaboration throughout Europe on
October 17 to oppose Turkey EU bid.

3) Cyprus Lists Conditions for Turkey’s EU Bid

ANKARA (AFP)–Cyprus will back the opening of European Union accession talks
with Turkey if Ankara makes several gestures to the Greek Cypriot government
which it does not recognize, Cypriot Foreign Minister George Iacovou said in a
newspaper interview on Sunday.
Iacovou said his government would not block Turkey’s bid when EU leaders take
up the issue in December if Ankara agrees to allow Greek Cypriot ships and
planes to use Turkish sea ports and air corridors and acknowledges Cyprus
as an
equal EU member.
“The Cyprus republic does not wish to use its veto right,” the minister told
the popular Turkish daily Sabah.
“But in order to escape such an unpleasant situation, Turkey should fulfill
the responsibilities I mentioned or at least make a binding statement that it
will do so by the time accession talks start, if it fails to fulfill them by
December,” he said.
The leaders of the 25 EU nations will decide on December 17 whether to start
membership talks with Turkey, an official candidate since 1999.
The European Commission, the EU executive arm, said earlier this month that
the Muslim nation had fulfilled the required democracy norms and recommended
the inauguration of talks.
The hostilities between Ankara and Nicosia stem from the three-decade
division
of Cyprus between its Turkish and Greek communities.
Turkey has maintained thousands of troops in the breakaway Turkish Cypriot
north of the island since 1974 when it invaded the enclave with the stated aim
of protecting its kinsmen against a Greek Cypriot coup aimed at uniting the
island with Greece.
An international initiative to end the conflict failed in April when the
Greek
Cypriots voted down a UN reunification plan, while the Turkish Cypriots, long
seen as an obstacle to any settlement, overwhelmingly endorsed it.
The outcome ensured that the internationally-recognized Greek Cypriot south
joined the EU on May 1, leaving the breakaway Turkish Cypriot north out in the
cold.
Ankara has rebuffed calls to recognize the Greek Cypriot government, arguing
that it bears the responsibility for the failure of the UN peace plan.

4) First European Armenian Convention Attracts Hundreds, Features Leading
European Union Experts

BRUSSELS–In a landmark event that brought over two hundred and fifty Armenian
advocacy leaders from more than fifteen European nations, the European
Armenian
Federation for Justice and Democracy (EAFJD) held the opening day of the first
ever Convention of European Armenians in the European Parliament building in
Brussels, Belgium on October 18.
The Convention, which takes place at a critical time for the more than two
million Armenians living in the European Union, provided a forum for scholarly
discussion, rigorous debate, and consensus-building on the role of Armenian
culture and identity within Europe, the implications of Turkey’s candidacy for
the European Union, and the expansion of the EU’s “neighborhood” to include
the
countries of the Caucasus. The opening day program, which included the first
two of the Convention’s sessions, featured presentations by senior European
policy-makers, intellectuals, and community leaders. Each presentation, which
was simultaneously translated in French, English, and Armenian, was
followed by
a question and answer session. The day’s events ended with a reception in the
European Parliament building.

Welcoming Remarks

The Convention opened with remarks from Francis Wurtz, (Member of European
Parliament–European United Left), the Chairman of the European Parliament
host
committee for this program. His remarks were followed by Ruben Shugarian, the
Deputy Foreign Minister of the Republic of Armenia, whose responsibilities
include Armenian diplomacy toward Europe and the Western Hemisphere. A welcome
speech was made by EAFJD Chairperson Hilda Tchoboian, who followed her remarks
by inviting Toros Sagherian, the Chairman of the Forum of Armenian
Associations
of Europe, to offer his thoughts to those in attendance. Messages of support
were read from the His Holiness Karekin II, Catholicos of all Armenians, His
Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of the Great House Cilicia, and His Beatitude
Nerses Bedros, XIX Patriach of Armenians Catholics.

Armenian Culture And Identity in Europe

The first session covered the issue of “Armenian Culture and Identity in
Europe,” a topic of pressing concern to community leaders committed to seeing
the Armenian contribution to Europe fully recognized and appreciated. The four
member panel was chaired by Alexis Govciyan, the Chairman of “Europe de la
Memoire.” The discussion started with a presentation, titled “The European
Linguistic Policy: Commission’s Planning 2004-2006,” by Jacques Delmoly, the
Head of the Language Policy Unit in the European Commission’s Directorate
General. He stressed the importance the Commission places on promoting a
favorable climate for the learning of languages based on a policy of
linguistic
diversity in an environment of integration. He spent considerable time
explaining the role of the Armenian language–which he cited as an official
European minority language–within this system of language education.
Delmoly’s official perspective on Armenian language education was followed by
Haroutioun Kurkjian, an Athens-based author of Armenian language text books.
After reviewing the context in which the Armenian community has evolved within
Europe, Kurkjian, in his presentation on “The Armenian Culture and the
European
Union,” stressed the need for the European Union to create a favorable
environment for multiculturalism, one that is conducive for the development of
Armenian language and culture. He noted his dissatisfaction with the
failure of
schools and the media to sufficiently propagate the Armenian language, and
called for the European Armenian community to undertake the gradual “cultural
rearming” of the Armenian diaspora.
The third speaker on the first panel was Prof. Mihran Dabag, the Director of
the Institute of Diasporas and Genocide at Bochum University in Germany. His
comments, titled “The Armenian Experience in the Context of European Policies
of Remembrance,” examined European attitudes and policies dealing with the
Armenian genocide and other aspects of Armenian history within the context of
traditional and modern European models of remembrance. He noted that Europe’s
remembrance has not normally been understood as including the Armenian
genocide, despite the fact that this crime falls well within the European
experience on a number of fronts. The Armenian genocide should be
recognized as
part of European history, he argued, not simply as an element of the
Turkish-Armenian relationship. Prof. Dabag cited the new Turkish Penal Code,
which criminalizes discussion of the Armenian genocide, as a prime example of
Turkey’s refusal to come to terms with this matter. Europe, he said, needs to
provide a political answer to the political issue of Turkey’s genocide of the
Armenian nation. Moving beyond the genocide issue, he stressed that the
Armenian community must make concerted efforts to create a framework that will
ensure that Armenian literature is accepted by Europeans as part of their own
tradition.
The final speaker in the first panel was Jules Mardirossian, Chairman of the
Armenian Studies, Information, and Documentation Center in France. The
comments
by this long-time intellectual and community leader were on the theme of “New
Identities, Political Challenges, and the Issue of Transfer of Culture.” In
his
presentation, Mardirossian explored the transformation of individual and
collective identity and values of Armenians in Europe. Starting with a
theoretical discussion of the nature of identity, he then described the
reality
of the post-modern, traditional, and transitional models of Armenian community
identity today. Mardirossian ended his sweeping review of the identity
challenges and opportunities facing the Armenians of Europe with the insight
that culture without politics cannot survive, while politics without
culture is
sterile.
Questions for the first panel included requests for additional insights into
how to secure EU funding for Armenian language education, the potential
loss of
the Melkonian School as a center of diasporan education, and the broader
neglect of identity building outside of Armenia. A spirited exchange on these
issues lasted an hour, and was only adjourned to make time for the group to
break for lunch.

EU-Armenia Relations

The second session, chaired by EAFJD Executive Director Laurent Leylekian,
moved the focus of discussion from Armenian identity within the Europe to the
EU’s relations with Armenia. This topic began with insights from Marie-Anne
Isler-Beguin, the Chairwoman of the EU-South Caucasus delegation. As the point
person in the European Parliament on engagement with Armenia and its Caucasus
neighbors, Isler-Beguin began by noting the EU’s concern about the Armenian
Cause, and stressing her appreciation of the fact that the concerns raised by
Armenians about Turkey’s candidacy are founded in fact. While noting that the
EU should use its leverage over Turkey’s entry to bring an end to the blockade
of Armenia, she added that she believed that, in time, Turkey would accept its
past and mutual interests would prevail over mutual hostility. On the topic of
EU-Armenia relations, Isler-Begiun stated that European institutions would
welcome progress by the Caucasus countries toward the EU family. She
specifically expressed encouragement about Armenia’s acceptance into the EU’s
new neighborhood program, the values that the EU and Armenia share, and the
prospect for continued cooperation between Europe and Armenia on specific
projects.
The second speaker, Vicken Tchitetchian, who serves as Armenia’s
Ambassador to
the European Union, provided an in-depth review of the current status and
future prospects for expanded EU-Armenia relations. He pointed out that
European integration was not being imposed from the outside, but rather sought
by the Armenian government, which is moving this process forward in a
realistic
and practical manner. Amb. Tchitetchian stressed that Armenia has made
progress
in its key areas of reform, despite the fact that its neighbor to the West has
sought, using the last closed border in Europe, to hinder its progress at
every
turn.
Also presenting as part of the second panel was Vahan Zanoyan, the CEO of the
Petroleum Finance Corporation and a world-renowned expert on international
energy issues. Zanoyan reviewed the history and current status of the
Baku-Tiblisi-Ceyhan pipeline and its implications for Armenia. He focused on
two pressing challenges for backers of the pipeline, namely financing, which
has largely been resolved via multilateral agencies, and the sufficiency of
oil
throughput for the line’s viability, which remains an open question. He then
spent considerable time offering his insights on the geopolitics of the
pipeline and its impact on Armenia and the region.
Richard Tibbels, the Armenian Desk Officer of the European Commission’s
Directorate General, offered a presentation on “EU-Armenia relations:
Challenges and Opportunities.” Tibbels, who works on a daily basis with the
Armenian government, stressed that Armenia has made considerable progress
across a number of reform areas–including alignment with European legal
standards, membership in the World Trade Organization, and in its poverty
reduction efforts. He also pointed out areas for improvement including the
conduct of the 2003 presidential elections, respect for human rights, and the
need to address income disparity and corruption as the economy grows stronger.
The neighborhood program is not a gateway to prospective EU membership, but
nor
does it, he explained, in any way close the door to future participation in
the
European Union. Tibbels closed by noting the critical role that Europe’s
Armenian community plays in bringing the EU and Armenia closer together.
The next presentation began with an announcement by Amb. Tchitetchian that
the
speaker–Demetrio Volcic–had been awarded the “Mkhitar Gosh” award in
recognition of his support for the rule of law and the virtue of justice.
Volcic, a former member of the European Parliament, noted that the EU has
adopted a new pattern of thinking about areas on its borders. The EU, he said,
can no longer afford to ignore the Caucasus region, and should devote
increasing attention to Turkey’s policies toward Armenia.
Volcic was followed by Armand Sarian, a noted economist from France, who
spoke
on the topic of “Economic Relations between Armenia and the EU.” Sarian began
by noting the economic importance of this relationship, on issues ranging from
investment to foreign aid. He stressed the progress Armenia has made on
economic issues, despite its lack of resources, the near total orientation of
its economy to Soviet markets, the 1988 earthquake, and the ongoing Turkish
and
Azerbaijani blockades. He underscored the need to continue Armenia’s
growth, to
foster the conditions for peace, and to make Armenia increasingly
attractive to
outside investors.
The final speaker of the day was Prof. Otto Luchterhandt, who teaches
International Law at the University of Hamburg. In his remarks, he outlined a
compelling historical and legal case for Karabagh’s right to
self-determination. In addition, he sharply criticized the EU’s inconsistency
in identifying serious shortcoming in Turkey’s willingness to meet clear
European standards, while still recommending that Turkey begin talks toward
eventual membership. He stated his strong opposition to any actions by the EU
that position it as a neutral party in the matter of the Armenian genocide.
The
proper role for the EU, he argued, is in the morally correct position of
pressing Turkey to come to terms with this crime.
During the discussion period, Deputy Foreign Minister Shugarian repeated a
point he had made several weeks earlier that Turkey’s recognition of the
Armenian genocide represents a security issue for the Republic of Armenia.
Other topics raised in questions included whether the EU was fully using its
leverage to press Turkey to meet international norms domestically and in its
conduct with neighboring states. Other issues for discussion included
Armenia’s
economic integration with Europe and the need for a differentiated EU approach
to the Caucasus countries based on the merits of their respective progress in
economic and political reforms.

Additional news about the second day of the Convention will be forthcoming.
The EAFJD represents more than 300 Armenian organizations in Europe.

5) The Christian Presence in Jerusalem in Jeopardy Declared His Holiness
Aram I

ANTELIAS–Referring to the recent attack of a Yeshiva student on Armenian
Archbishop in Jerusalem Nourhan Manougian, His Holiness Aram I stated, “The
news coming from the Christian quarter of Jerusalem is worrying and
disturbing.
The Churches and Christians in Jerusalem are increasingly witnessing the kind
of incidents and situations which clearly indicate the existence of a well
planned Israeli policy of Judiazation of Jerusalem. In fact, different
manifestations of this policy are forcing the Christians to migration. It is a
fact that the numerical size of Christian communities is very much reduced and
the activities of the churches are becoming limited.”
Expressing his deep concern about this situation, His Holiness Aram I
declared, “We cannot remain silent and indifferent in view of these attempts
aimed at de-Christianization of Jerusalem. Jerusalem has been the
birthplace of
Christianity. Its Christian identity must be preserved. The right and
privileges of all religious communities must be protected. Jerusalem must
become a city of dialogue, tolerance, and peace. The Judiazation of Jerusalem
will greatly harm the peace process in the region. Therefore, we urgently
appeal to the international community to take this matter very seriously. More
than at any time, at this critical point of the history of humanity, mutual
respect, and tolerance between religions, nations, and communities must
constitute the firm bases of all societies.”

6) Putin, Aliyev Discuss Karabagh

MOSCOW (AzerTag)–Russian President Vladimir Putin met with his Azeri
counterpart Ilham Aliyev in Moscow on Tuesday, to discuss bilateral trade and
political issues, including the Mountainous Karabagh conflict.
Aliyev expressed hoped that Russia, as a co-chair of the OSCE [Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe] Minsk Group [on Mountainous Karabagh]
would make serious efforts to settle the Karabagh conflict.
Putin welcomed the continuation of presidential meetings between Armenia and
Azerbaijan related to Karabagh, and said that Russia stands ready to render
active assistance in finding an acceptable settlement to the conflict.
“Russia welcomes continuation of Azeri-Armenian dialogue at various levels,
primarily at the top level, and is prepared to render active assistance to the
sides involved in the conflict–both bilaterally and as a co-chairman of the
OSCE Minsk Group, in the search for a mutually acceptable solution and to act
as guarantor of the prospective accord,” a Russian presidential administration
official pointed out.

All subscription inquiries and changes must be made through the proper carrier
and not Asbarez Online. ASBAREZ ONLINE does not transmit address changes and
subscription requests.
(c) 2004 ASBAREZ ONLINE. All Rights Reserved.

ASBAREZ provides this news service to ARMENIAN NEWS NETWORK members for
academic research or personal use only and may not be reproduced in or through
mass media outlets.