Author: Khoyetsian Rose

THIRD ROUND OF EU-ARMENIA NEGOTIATIONS TO START MAY 3 IN YEREVAN
ArmRadio.am
02.05.2006 16:06
May 3 the third round of negotiations on elaboration of the EU-Armenia
Actions Plan in the framework of the European Neighborhood Policy
will be held in Yerevan.
Representatives of interested agencies of the Republic of Armenia
and the European Commission will participate in the negotiations. RA
delegation is headed by Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Bayburdyan, the
European delegation is leaded by European Commission Director on Issues
of Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia Hugues Mingarelly.
The points not agreed upon during the previous round are going to
be discussed.

Schweizerische Depeschenagentur AG (SDA)
SDA – Service de base francais
29 avril 2006
Genocide armenien: affaire Dogu Perincek Le juge vaudois Jacques
Antenen renvoie le Turc devant la justice
Lausanne f
Lausanne (ats) Le juge d’instruction vaudois Jacques Antenen a
renvoye le Turc Dogu Perincek devant le Tribunal de police de
Lausanne pour discrimination raciale. Le chef du Parti des
Travailleurs, qui qualifie le genocide armenien de mensonge, risque
jusqu’a six mois de prison.
L’ordonnance a ete rendue par defaut, a indique samedi a l’ATS
Jacques Antenen confirmant ainsi des informations parues dans les
quotidiens vaudois “24 Heures” et zurichois “Tages Anzeiger”. Cette
procedure s’explique par le fait que le leader turc n’a plus donne de
ses nouvelles et s’est separe de ses avocats dans le canton de Vaud
et a Zurich.
“Mensonge international”
Nationaliste de gauche, Dogu Perincek est venu fin juillet 2005 en
Suisse a l’occasion du 82e anniversaire du Traite de Lausanne. A
Lausanne et a Glattbrugg (ZH), il a notamment declare que le genocide
armenien de 1915 etait un “mensonge international”.
A la suite de ces propos le juge Antenen l’a entendu en septembre. Le
magistrat avait dit renoncer “pour l’instant” a toute inculpation
pour violation de l’art. 261bis du Code penal qui reprime notamment
les propos negationnistes.
La question armenienne provoque des tensions recurrentes et fortes
entre Berne et la Turquie. Si Ankara reconnaît la realite des
massacres perpetres par l’Empire ottoman contre la minorite
armenienne, elle recuse le terme de “genocide” et conteste le nombre
de morts, le chiffre d’un million etant generalement avance.
Visites remises en cause
En août 2005, Ankara a reporte sine die la visite du conseiller
federal Joseph Deiss en Turquie. La decision survenait un mois après
les declarations fracassantes emanant notamment de Dogu Perincek et
l’ouverture de procedures penales.
En Suisse, le Conseil national a reconnu officiellement le genocide
armenien et le Grand Conseil vaudois a fait le pas en 2003. A la
suite de cet evenement, la conseillère federale Micheline Calmy-Rey
n’avait pas pu visiter la Turquie comme prevu et avait dû attendre
mars dernier pour s’y rendre.
L’entreprise Pilatus ecartee
La dernière repercussion de ces tensions entre la Turquie et la
Suisse a touche Pilatus. La fabrique d’avions n’a pas ete autorisee a
soumettre une offre pour le renouvellement d’une partie de flotte
militaire turque.
–Boundary_(ID_EIQfgbpkFqKptpcS2V8wmg)–

Op-Ed: Blowback in Africa
By RAFFI KHATCHADOURIAN
New York Times
April 28, 2006
EVER since Chad gained independence 46 years ago, it has been a
world-class model of political dysfunction. In the 1970’s, Chad’s
president, François Tombalbaye, compelled civil servants to
renounce Western customs, undergo a tribal initiation rite known as
yondo and profess belief in a nationalist creed he called
Chaditude. He was executed in 1975. In the 1980’s, a rebel leader
named Hissène Habré led an army to the presidential palace and
seized power. He became known as the “African Pinochet” and
murderously pursued opponents for nearly a decade.
In 1990, Mr. Habré was chased out by an armed faction led by Chad’s
current president, Idriss Déby. Now Mr. Déby is facing his own
rebellion.
Americans might dismiss this numbing cycle of coups as esoteric
history belonging to a troubled and distant country. They
shouldn’t. The C.I.A. armed Mr. Habré for years, and since 2003,
the United States military has been training and equipping
Mr. Déby’s army, making his fight to stay in office our fight, too.
Last year, Chad took part in a vast, international military exercise
organized by the United States – the largest exercise of its kind in
Africa since World War II, according to the Defense Department. This
summer, American forces will continue to advise Chadian soldiers, and
Congress is expected to allocate $500 million for a five-year program
to train and equip several Saharan armies – including Mr. Déby’s.
The military hopes these initiatives will help contain the threat of
terrorism by bringing order to the Great Desert and its
borderlands. For centuries, the Sahara has been a lawless realm, and
with millions of Muslims living across the region in isolated
communities, counterterrorism officials fear that Islamic militants
may seek sanctuary there.
But dispensing military aid to Chad now – with Mr. Déby fighting
hundreds of rebels backed by Sudan – seems reckless. It puts American
military equipment and expertise in the hands of a desperate
dictator. Worse still, it risks pouring additional fuel into the human
furnace of Darfur, and it may well come to impede the careful
diplomatic work required to solve that crisis.
So far, American officials have made much of Sudanese assistance to
the rebels, framing the recent conflict in Chad as an outgrowth of the
tragedy in Darfur. There is some truth to this. But the violence in
Chad also has its own political narrative. During his 16 years in
power, Mr. Déby has ruled Chad brutally. His security forces have
committed torture, rapes, summary executions and mass killings.
Mr. Déby is a member of the Zaghawa – a northern tribe making up
roughly 5 percent of Chad’s population – and last year the State
Department described his regime as a Zaghawa oligarchy shielded by a
security and intelligence apparatus that violates human rights with
impunity. In 2004, Mr. Déby altered Chad’s Constitution to grant
himself another term in office. Elections are scheduled for next
Wednesday. There is little likelihood they will be fair.
Only one compelling argument exists for giving Chad military aid, and
it follows from the logic of lesser evils. Many of the refugees
fleeing Darfur are Zaghawa, and Mr. Déby has taken them in. If his
regime collapses, tens of thousands of people will once again be at
the mercy of Sudan’s janjaweed marauders, and the genocide may spread.
This argument, though, is complicated by another unsettling
development. In recent months, scores of Chadian soldiers have
defected to the rebel militias. If the defections continue, they raise
the horrific possibility that American military equipment and
expertise could end up going to men aligned with the janjaweed. In
that case, our military assistance to Chad, far from containing
political anarchy, would only add to it.
Raffi Khatchadourian traveled to Chad in 2005 for the International
Reporting Project at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced
International Studies.
n/28khatchadourian.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Azeri, US presidents note importance of expanding partnership
Turan news agency, Baku
28 Apr 06
Washington, 28 April: Energy and regional security, the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict and problems of democratization were in
the centre of attention at today’s meeting between the US and
Azerbaijani presidents in Washington, the two heads of state said at a
news conference in the courtyard of the White House after the
negotiations.
[Azerbaijani President] Ilham Aliyev said that he and George Bush
discussed “all important issues”, a special correspondent of Turan
reports. The sides expressed a mutual opinion about the need to expand
and strengthen strategic partnership between the two countries, he
pointed out.
For his part, George Bush confirmed that they also touched on the
Iranian issue, but he did not disclose details. He stressed that the
two heads of state think it important to expand and strengthen
democracy in the region.

The Armenian Genocide”
April 28, 2006
Ken A. Bode
“The Armenian Genocide,” which aired on most PBS stations on April 17
is a powerful indictment of the Ottoman Empire for its forced
relocation and systemic effort to eliminate its Armenian population.
Produced for Oregon Public Television by Andrew Goldberg of Two Cats
Productions, the hour-long documentary is an impressive gathering of
historical material interpreted by knowledgeable and respected
scholars, leading to the inescapable conclusion that in 1915, with
the outbreak of World War I, there was a brutal and methodical
campaign to slaughter and destroy Armenians, directed by the Turkish
authorities of the time.
That the present government of Turkey does not subscribe to these
conclusions is well known. The official Turkish position is that
local Armenians supported the invading Russian army and also engaged
in sporadic uprisings against Ottoman authorities. Indeed, many
Armenian Christians were killed, but so were many Muslims, in what
Turkey insists was a civil war. There were deportations, Turkey
admits, but no centrally directed genocide. Genocide denial is the
official position of the Turkish government today, backed by that
country’s criminal code.
In the documentary, the Turkish view of history is represented by the
head of the Turkish Historical Society, with testimony by Gunduz
Aktan, the former Turkish ambassador and by Prof. Justin McCarthy of
the University of Louisville, whose long-standing view is that there
was no centrally directed genocide. In a pre-broadcast letter to CPB,
David Saltzman, counsel to the Assembly of Turkish American
Associations, raised a number of questions about PBS motives and
responsibilities in promoting “a single version of the truth.”
Despite the presence of voices that support his country’s position,
the present Turkish ambassador, Nabi Sensoy, issued a post-broadcast
complaint saying that the show was “blatantly one-sided” and
reflected “a self-serving political agenda by Armenian American
activists.”
On the central question of whether there was a genocide, the
documentary agrees with the view represented by the International
Association of Genocide Scholars that, yes, there was. Samantha Power
addresses this issue in her 2002 Pulitzer prize winning book, “A
Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide.” Power devotes
the opening chapter to a review of the treatment of the Armenians in
1915, citing reports from the American Ambassador to the Ottoman
Empire Henry Morganthau who cabled Washington on July 10:
“Persecutions of Armenians assuming unprecedented proportions.
Reports from widely scattered districts indicate systematic attempt
to uproot peaceful Armenian populations and through arbitrary
arrests, terrible tortures, whole-sale expulsions and deportations
from one end of the Empire to the other accompanied by frequent
instances of rape, pillage, and murder, turning into massacre, to
bring destruction on them. These measures are not in response to
popular or fanatical demand but are purely arbitrary and directed
from Constantinople in the name of military necessity, often in
districts where no military operations are likely to take place.”
Morganthau warned Washington, “there seems to be a systematic plan to
crush the Armenian race.” In 1915, the New York Times devoted 145
stories to the Turkish horrors, and former President Theodore
Roosevelt joined in the unsuccessful effort to persuade the American
government to denounce the Ottoman Empire for the atrocities. Nothing
happened and eventually Amb. Morganthau resigned in despair.
In 1915, genocide was a crime without a name. Over the next three
decades, a Polish Jew named Raphael Lemkin conducted a one-man
campaign to create a universal jurisdiction whereby instigators or
perpetrators of attempts to wipe out national, ethnic or religious
groups would become an international crime that could be punished
anywhere, like slavery or piracy. Exhibit A in Lemkin’s campaign was
the Armenian episode. Lemkin appears in the documentary talking about
the genocide against Armenians.
A Number of Questions
Andrew Goldberg’s documentary pulls no punches on the question of
whether there was a genocide in 1915, and Coby Atlas, PBS senior vice
president, told the Washington Post that PBS considers the genocide
to be “settled history.” However, the PBS ombudsman, Michael Getler,
wrote a thoughtful analysis ending as a skeptic on that point.
Perhaps, mused Getler, over time there will be “greater agreement and
acknowledgment about what happened in the years around 1915 than
there has been until now.” He adds that there is simply not the same
kind of evidence for genocide in Turkey as historians have assembled
to document the Holocaust during W.W.II. Getler concludes:
“Furthermore, the action is strongly denied and refuted by the
country involved, Turkey, and there are historians, as has been
shown, who question not whether terrible things happened but whether
there is enough evidence to use that powerful descriptor, Genocide.”
This evident disagreement between a top programming executive and the
network’s ombudsman affords greater relevance to the series of
pre-broadcast questions submitted by David Saltzman on behalf of the
Assembly of Turkish American Associations. Saltzman inquired how PBS
and CPB achieved the right to proclaim definite positions on historic
controversies. By what standards, he asks, are these judgments made?
What exactly is the PBS position on the Armenian genocide, and by
what process was this position adopted? Given Mr. Getler’s doubts
about whether genocide occurred, these are good questions.
In the opinion of Andrew Goldberg, the documentary producer,
unwillingness by the PBS ombudsman to apply the word genocide means,
in effect, that Getler chose the Turkish side. “If you don’t use that
word, you are enabling denial,” says Goldberg.
This brings us to the PBS decision to add a post-program roundtable,
“Armenian Genocide: Exploring the Issues.” The discussion was taped
at National Geographic studios in Washington, D.C., and moderated by
NPR’s Scott Simon. Consistent with the PBS position on “settled
history,” the objective of the panel was to “explore more deeply the
question of why the Turkish government and its supporters continue to
reject the genocide label.”
The very existence of this after-show generated considerable
controversy, including hundreds of e-mails on both sides and an
on-line petition against the discussion that drew thousands of
signatures. Predictably, Armenians opposed the panel discussion on
grounds that it would dilute the firm conclusions of the documentary.
Turks supported it as another opportunity to cast the events of 1915
as something short of genocide.
Perhaps the most unfortunate part of the agitation was that several
members of Congress got involved in urging PBS not to air the panel
discussion. As one party to the documentary put it, “They control the
appropriations. There is an implicit threat in their intervention.”
The panelists chosen to explore the issues in the after-show included
two scholars representing the Armenian side, Peter Balakian, author
of “The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America’s
Response,” and Taner Akcam, a professor from the University of
Minnesota. Both were featured as witnesses in the documentary,
Balakian with credits as an editorial consultant and writer.
Representing the Turkish view were Professor Justin McCarthy from the
University of Louisville and Turkish professor Omer Turan.
Organized as it was, the panel amounted to a quasi-academic version
of “Crossfire,” with Balakian aggressively accusing McCarthy of being
a paid agent of the Turkish government. Omer Turan’s facility with
English was so limited that the moderator, Scott Simon, admitted at
one point that he was lost. All in all, very little was accomplished
by this panel. That opinion was echoed by programmers in many PBS
venues who decided not to broadcast the panel or to do so at 3:00 or
5:00 a.m.
This is not to say that the idea of an after-show panel was a bad
one. This one did not work, but it may serve as a valuable lesson for
the future. The group should not have included members who already
had their say in the preceding documentary, and care should have been
taken to be sure that all participants had an adequate facility with
English.
With issues as deeply controversial as those treated in “The Armenian
Genocide,” it should be regular policy for PBS to sponsor and pay for
a panel of reputable, independent scholars able to step back and
offer intelligent perspective and commentary on what the viewers have
just watched. If the experts are chosen wisely, it can only add to
PBS adhering to the requirements of fairness and balance. Then, when
PBS arranges for an after-show, it should assure the quality of the
product and stand behind it with strong encouragement that affiliate
stations run the panel discussion immediately following the
documentary.
Finally, there is the matter of funding. At the beginning and end of
the documentary lengthy credits reveal that nearly all the support
for this project came from foundations, families or individuals with
Armenian surnames. PBS has assured its viewers that all donors were
properly vetted, though who knows what that actually means? Full
transparency is important, and the list does convey the unfortunate
impression that the documentary, “The Armenian Genocide,” was paid
for by one side of the argument.
Public skepticism about our business is so great that PBS should be
cognizant of impressions. For example, when KCET in Los Angeles–home
to one of the largest Armenian populations in America — decided not
to air the Goldberg documentary, it prompted this response from KCET
viewer Ruth Blandon:
“The word on the street is that you’ve been paid off by people
interested and invested in maintaining silence about the genocide.
Turkish money, perhaps? Republican money? Someone else’s money? The
word is out.
“There have already been many murmurs about corruption at PBS within
a different context. I don’t understand your programming choices
which only serve to add fuel to the fire. And I hope you reconsider
your poor choice not to air the Goldberg documentary as well as who
your audience is.
“Shame on you.”
My conclusion is that this was an excellent documentary, well
supported with historical fact and expert witnesses. It raised vital
issues that the nation of Turkey remains unwilling to deal with,
because, as Samantha Power suggests in the program, to acknowledge
genocide would put that nation in the sorry company of Adolph Hitler
and Nazi Germany. The contrary opinion of the ombudsman Mr. Getler
leaves PBS in a fog of ambivalence.

Armenian Consumers Association call upon boycotting Turkish goods
ArmRadio.am
25.04.2006 17:26
`We should start boycotting Turkish goods in the Armenian market. This
is, first of all, a problem of our national dignity, and then an
economic issue,’ President of the Armenian Consumers Association Armen
Pogosyan has announced at a news conference on April 25.
However, according to him, surveys have shown that many Turkish goods
meet consumer standards and it is impossible to isolate fully the
Armenian market from Turkish goods. `Our citizens should understand
that they should not buy some products, despite it is cheap, as it
touches upon dignity of any Armenian, who remembers history of his
people,’ Armen Pogosyan noted.
As a REGNUM correspondent reports, the association’s president
reminded that when the French Senate recognized the Armenian Genocide
of 1915, `on that very day the Turkish Union for Consumer Rights
Protection announced boycott against French goods imported to the
country.’ `We should undertake administrative measures too, without
violation of the law for consumer rights protection, ‘ concluded Armen
Pogosyan.

OTE DOES NOT DISCLOSE DETAILS OF TALKS ON SELLING ARMENTEL
PanARMENIAN.Net
27.04.2006 22:01 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ OTE Greek telecommunication corporation does not
disclose the details of the talks on selling the 90% of shares of
ArmenTel Armenian company, owned by OTE. The Corporation’s Press
Service stated they have nothing to add to the press release of April
4. We remind that the OTE press release of April 4 said that after
consultations with the Armenian Government OTE is considering the
opportunity to sell the package of ArmenTel shares it holds.
The OTE Press Service did not answer the question who may be the
potential buyers and the terms of implementation of the deal. They
also refrained from comments on the prospects of pre-sale division of
ArmenTel into several parts (fixed and international communication,
mobile communication, Internet services), Mediamax reports.

CATHOLICOS OF ALL ARMENIANS RECEIVES PRESIDENT OF LITHUANIA
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Today
Apr 27 2006
ETCHMIADZIN, APRIL 27, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. Karekin II
Catholicos of All Armenians received on April 26 at the Mother See of
Holy Etchmiadzin President of Lithuania Valdas Adamkus and Mrs Alma
Adamkie. Welcoming the Lithuanian President’s visit to the spiritual
center of all Armenians, His Holiness presented him the history of the
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, its important mission in the Armenian
people’s life and the activity of the Armenian Apostolic Church in
the post-Soviet period. “We pray the God that in the case of our two
peoples, the Soviet years were not able to mutilate people’s spiritual
life, their sole and love towards the Christ. By the belief and hope
towards the Christ, our peoples’ sons were able to strengthen their
belief, resist ordeals and create independence of their countries,”
the Catholicos of All Armenians said, wishing that the God keeps strong
the two peoples’ and states’ mutual relations and even strengthen with
newest developments of those ties the two republics for the well-being
of the peoples’ peaceful, creative life. His Holiness thanked the
President of Lithuania for recognition of the Armenian Genocide and
touched upon with satisfaction the careful attitude as well that the
authorities of Lithuania show towards the Armenian community who lives
with the Christian brothers peacefully, with brotherly love, having all
the freedoms and possibilities to organize their spiritual, national
and cultural life. As Noyan Tapan was informed by the Information
Services of the Mother See, Valdas Adamkus, expressing his respect
towards the Armenian Church and the Armenian Catholicos, touched
upon the important role of the church in the affair of keeping and
strengthening spiritual and moral values in the society and especially
among the younger generation. “…When you observe your history,
you see with great respect what Christian fundamental values Your
church has given to its people,” the President of Lithuania mentioned.
The interchurch and interreligious relations were also touched upon
at the meeting as well as they spoke about efforts made by Christian
churches in the affair of establishing peace in the world, brotherhood
among peoples and love. At the end the President of the Republic of
Lithuania visited the Patriarchate museum, the Cathedral. RA Justice
Minister David Haroutiunian accompanied the President of Lithuania
and his wife.

CURRENT SITTINGS OF RA-NKR PARLIAMENTARY COOPERATION COMMISSION TO BE HELD IN STEPANAKERT
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
April 26 2006
April 26-27 current joint sittings of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic (NKR) and RA Parliamentary Cooperation Commission will
be held in Stepanakert. According to the information DE FACTO
Information-Analytics Agency got at the NKR National Assembly’s Press
Service, RA delegation is headed by the Parliament vice Speaker, RA –
NKR Cooperation Commission Chair Tigran Torosyan.
The issues referring to raising efficiency of the Parliamentary
activity from the viewpoint of improving the permanent commissions’
structures are to be considered. The sittings’ participants will
review the present stage of the Karabakh problem’s discussions at
the European structures and interparliamentary relations and in
this connection – possible incentive of the Nagorno Karabakh – RA
parliamentary cooperation.
The issues of cooperation of both Republics’ Parliaments within the
frames of the process of elaboration of the NKR Constitution will be
discussed as well.

IRAN WILL STRIKE FIRST IN CASE THE USA USES THE TERRITORY OF AZERBAIJAN
Yerevan, April 25. ArmInfo. ‘American intelligence groups are at work
in Azerbaijan against Iran,’ stated in on interview to ‘Al-Ahram’
newspaper, Egypt, Ali Larijani, head of the Supreme National Security
Council of Iran.
He stated that the American special services use the territories
of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan against Iran. According to him,
in case the military actions unfold, Iran may strike a blow at the
Baku-Tbilisi-Seyhan oil pipe line and the oil objects of Azerbaijan.
This was informed by iran.ru.