Author: Maghakian Mike

Armenian National Committee of America-Western Region
104 North Belmont Street, Suite 200
Glendale, California 91206
Phone: 818.500.1918
Fax: 818.246.7353
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:

PRESS RELEASE
April 25, 2007

Contact: Haig Hovsepian
Tel: (818) 500-1918

Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies Calls on Speaker Pelosi and
Chairman Lantos to Ensure Passage of H. Res. 106

— Center Thanks Congressman Schiff for Coauthoring H. Res. 106

Los Angeles, CA – On the occasion of the 92nd Anniversary Commemorating
the Armenian Genocide, The Armenian National Committee of America –
Western Region (ANCA-WR) welcomed a letter from Dr. Samuel M. Edelman,
Ph. D., Co-Director of the State of California Center of Excellence for
the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, Human Rights and Tolerance, urging
key Members of the United States House of Representatives to ensure
passage of H. Res. 106, the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

Dr. Edelman addressed the letter to three Members in the House of
Representatives. Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA-29), who authored H.
Res. 106, Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA-12), who is the Chairman of the
House Committee on Foreign Affairs where H. Res. 106 currently sits, and
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-08).

The first letter, addressed to Speaker Pelosi asks that "[Speaker
Pelosi] support this resolution and, as Speaker of the House, ensure its
speedy passage by the U.S. House." The second letter, addressed to
Representative Schiff, thanks the Congressman for authoring H. Res. 106,
which is entitled "Affirmation of the United States Record on the
Armenian Genocide Resolution." The second letter, addressed to Chairman
Lantos, asks that "[Chairman Lantos] support this resolution and, as
Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, ensure its passage by
your committee and its speedy referral to the House."

In each letter, Dr. Edelman notes the United States’ international
humanitarian relief effort in response to the Armenian Genocide and that
comparatively, this effort was one of the greatest relief efforts of all
time. Additionally, he discusses the gravity of the crime of genocide
and the United States’ historical record documenting the Armenian
Genocide which is "all the more poignant given the current genocide in
Darfur."

"These letters demonstrate that the California Center of Excellence for
the Study of the Holocaust and Genocide stands in solidarity with people
of good conscience all over the world in calling the Armenian Genocide
what it is – the first genocide of the 20th Century," remarked Andrew
Kzirian, Executive Director of the ANCA-WR. "As Jefferson stated, ‘in
matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand
like a rock,’" he added.

The Armenian National Committee of America is the largest and most
influential Armenian American grassroots political organization. Working
in coordination with a network of offices, chapters, and supporters
throughout the United States and affiliated organizations around the
world, the ANCA actively advances the concerns of the Armenian American
community on a broad range of issues.

###

[Congressional Record: April 23, 2007 (House)]
[Page H3755-H3756]
>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr23ap07-102]

WHY THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE MATTERS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Mr. SCHIFF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, tonight I plan to speak on the anniversary
of the Armenian genocide; but before I do, I want to join my colleagues
in expressing my sincere condolence at the passing of Juanita
Millender-McDonald, someone who in my very first days of Congress
impressed me as a courageous, intelligent, dedicated public servant
who, every time I went to her for help on an issue in her committee or
outside her committee, was generous with her time and her energy,
always ready to help, always of good cheer, and someone that I think
enjoyed the unanimous and bipartisan respect of everyone in this body.
Her memory will be cherished; her presence will be deeply missed.
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the 92nd anniversary of the start of the
Armenian genocide. In January, I introduced a resolution in the House,
along with my colleagues, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Knollenberg and Mr.
Radanovich, that would recognize the Armenian genocide. This resolution
should be passed. Ghazaros Kademian is one reason why.
Ghazaros Kademian was just 6 years old when his family was forced
into exile by Ottoman Turks bent on annihilating the Armenian people.
His father was murdered by Turk gendarmes, and the rest of his family
was forced to flee on foot to Kirkuk, where his mother died from cold
and hunger. He was separated from his siblings and orphaned.
Mr. Kademian’s story is terrible, but is not remarkable. Over a
million and a half Armenians were murdered in the first genocide of the
last century as the Ottoman Empire used the cloak of war to wipe out a
people it considered alien or disloyal. This mammoth crime was well
known at the time. Newspapers of the day were filled with stories about
the murder of the Armenians. “Appeal to Turkey to Stop Massacres”
headlined the New York Times on April 28, 1915, just as the killing
began. By October 7 of that year, the Times reported that 800,000
Armenians had been slain in cold blood in Asia Minor. In mid-December
of 1915, the Times spoke of a million Armenians killed or in exile.
Thousands of pages of evidence documenting the atrocities rest in our
own National Archives. Prominent citizens of the day, including
America’s ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, and
Britain’s Lord Bryce, reported on the massacres in great detail.
Morgenthau was appalled at what he would later call sadistic orgies of
rape, torture, and murder. “When the Turkish authorities gave the
orders for these deportations, they were merely giving the death
warrant to a whole race. They understood this well and made no
particular attempt to conceal the fact.”
Even those who most ardently advocated sweeping the murder of a
million and a half people under the rug of history have conceded that
the vast majority of historians accept the Armenian genocide as
historic fact. And how could they not? For it was the Government of
Turkey that in early 1919 held a number of well-publicized trials of
some of the young Turk leaders and executed the Keimal Bey, governor of
Diarbekir, specifically for his role as one of the Ottoman Empire’s
most savage persecutors of the Armenian people. The trials were as
widely covered in the American press as was the genocide itself.
So if the facts are not in dispute, why are so many nations complicit
in modern Turkey’s strenuous efforts to deny

[[Page H3756]]

the genocide ever took place? First, opponents argue that recognizing
the unpleasant facts of the genocide and of the mass murder risk
alienating an important alliance with Turkey. There is no question that
Turkey is bitterly opposed to recognition and is threatening our
military and commercial relationship, including access to the Incirlik
air base, but Turkey has made similar threats to other nations in the
past only to retreat from them and the European Union’s insistence that
Ankara recognize the crimes of its Ottoman’s forebears before Turkey is
admitted to the EU has not dimmed Turkish enthusiasm for joining the
EU.
If Turkish relations with the U.S. do suffer, it is far more likely
that the genocide recognition will be a pretext. The Bush
administration has done such a poor job managing our relations with
Turkey over the last 6 years that we have already seen the limits of
the U.S.-Turkish alliance tested and found lacking.
During the run-up to the war in Iraq, Turkey denied us permission to
bring in ground forces from its soil, allowing the Saddam Fedeyeen to
melt away and form the basis of a now persistent insurgency. Oddly
enough, critics of recognition decry it as pandering to the victims,
but are only too happy to pander to the sensibilities of an
inconsistent ally, and one that has shown no qualms about accusing the
U.S. of genocide in Iraq.
Second, opponents take issue with the timing of the resolution and
argue that Turkey is making progress with recognizing the dark chapters
of its history. This claim lost all credibility when Orhan Pamuk,
Turkey’s Nobel Prize winning author, was brought up on charges of
“insulting Turkishness” for alluding to the genocide, and Turkish
Armenian publisher Hrant Dink was gunned down outside his office in
Istanbul earlier this year.
Tomorrow marks the 92nd Anniversary of start of the Armenian
Genocide. In January, I introduced a resolution in the House that would
recognize the Armenian Genocide. It should be passed. Ghazaros Kademian
is one reason why.
Ghazaros Kademian was just 6 years old when his family was forced
into exile by Ottoman Turks bent on annihilating the Armenian people.
His father was murdered by Turk gendarmes and the rest of the family
was forced to flee on foot to Kirkuk, where his mother died from cold
and hunger. He was separated from his siblings and orphaned.
Mr. Kademian’s story is terrible, but not remarkable. Over a million
and a half Armenians were murdered in the first genocide of the last
century as the Ottoman Empire used the cloak of war to wipe out a
people it considered alien and disloyal. This mammoth crime was well
known at the time; newspapers of the day were filled with stories about
the murder of Armenians. “Appeal to Turkey to stop massacres”
headlined the New York Times on April 28, 1915, just as the killing
began. By October 7 of that year, the Times reported that 800,000
Armenians had been slain in cold blood in Asia Minor. In mid-December
of 1915, the Times spoke of a million Armenians killed or in exile.
Thousands of pages of evidence documenting the atrocities rest in our
own National Archives.
Prominent citizens of the day, including America’s Ambassador to the
Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, and Britain’s Lord Bryce reported on
the massacres in great detail. Morgenthau was appalled at what he would
later call the sadistic orgies of rape, torture, and murder. “When the
Turkish authorities gave the orders for these deportations, they were
merely giving the death warrant to a whole race; they understood this
well, and . . . made no particular attempt to conceal the fact.”
Even those who have most ardently advocated sweeping the murder of a
million and a half people under the rug of history have conceded that
the vast majority of historians accept the Armenian Genocide as
historical fact. And how could they not–for it was the Government of
Turkey that, in early 1919, held a number of well-publicized trials of
some of the Young Turk leaders and executed Keimal Bey, the governor of
Diarbekir, specifically for his role as one of the Ottoman Empire’s
most savage persecutors of the Armenian people. The trials, by the way,
were as widely covered in the American press as was the genocide
itself.
So if the facts are not in dispute, why are so many nations complicit
in modern Turkey’s strenuous efforts to deny the genocide ever took
place? First, opponents argue that recognizing the unpleasant fact of
mass murder risks alienating our important alliance with Turkey. There
is no question that Turkey is bitterly opposed to recognition, and is
threatening our military and commercial relationship, including access
to the Incirlik air base. But Turkey has made similar threats to other
nations in the past only to retreat from them and the European Union’s
insistence that Ankara recognize the crimes of its Ottoman forebears
before Turkey is admitted to the EU has not dimmed Turkish enthusiasm
for joining the EU.
If Turkish relations with the U.S. do suffer, it is far more likely
that the genocide recognition will be a pretext; the Bush
Administration has done such a poor job managing our relations with
Turkey over the last six years that we have already seen the limits of
the U.S. Turkish alliance tested and found lacking. During the run-up
to the war in Iraq, Turkey denied us permission to bring in ground
forces from its soil, allowing the Saddam Fedeyeen to melt away and
form the basis of a now persistent insurgency. Oddly enough, critics of
recognition decry it as pandering to the victims, but are only too
happy to pander to the sensibilities of an inconstant ally, and one
that has shown no qualms about accusing the U.S. of genocide in Iraq.
Second, opponents take issue with the timing of the resolution and
argue that Turkey is making progress with recognizing the dark chapters
of its history. This claim lost all credibility when Orhan Pamuk,
Turkey’s Nobel Prize winning author was brought up on charges for
“insulting Turkishness” for alluding to the genocide, and Turkish
Armenian publisher Hrant Dink was gunned down outside his office in
Istanbul earlier this year. Yet some opponents go even further, such as
a former Ambassador to Turkey who argued that the time may never be
right for America to comment “on another’s history or morality.” Such
a ludicrous policy would condemn Congress to silence on a host of human
rights abuses around the world. After more than ninety years and with
only a few survivors left, if the time is not right now to recognize
the Armenian Genocide, when will it be?
But the most pernicious argument against recognition is the claim
that speaking the truth would harm relations with Turkey “for no good
reason.” How can we claim the moral authority to decry the genocide in
Darfur, as we must, if we are unwilling to deplore other genocides when
it would inconvenience an ally? Elie Wiesel has described the denial of
genocide as the final stage of genocide–a double killing. If you don’t
think he’s right, talk to Ghazaros Kademian. But you had better hurry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Ms. ESHOO addressed the House. Her remarks will appear hereafter in
the Extensions of Remarks.)

Robert Kocharyan: Armenia interested in having constructive relations with Georgia and Iran

ArmRadio.am
28.04.2007 12:59

"Armenia has four neighbors, with two of which it has no diplomatic
ties, and is in "no war, no peace" situation with one of these. Under
these circumstances we are interested in having constructive and
dynamically developing relations with Georgia and Iran," RA President
Robert Kocharyan said, speaking at the meeting with the students and
faculty of the Yerevan State University. Armenia implements serious
programs of strategic importance with Iran.

"As for the nuclear programs of Iran, one thing is obvious: both the
authorities and people think that it is their right, the act within
the bounds of their responsibilities and perceive the refusal from the
program as a matter of national dignity. Under these circumstances
resolutions and sanctions cannot have considerable impact. These
developments are dangerous and unwanted for us. Our position is
distinct: the issue should be resolved via peace talks," Robert
Kocharyan mentioned.

With the example of Armenian-Turkish relations, the President
explained that by keeping the border closed, Turkey will not have
Armenia refuse from demands to recognize the Armenian Genocide. In
his words, Armenia has assumed an honest position on the issue with
both conflicting sides – the US and Iran. " We honestly tell the
American party how important the relations with Iran are for us and
say that complexities are unwanted," the President clarified. Mr.
Kocharyan noted that during his meeting with the President of Iran
it has been noted that Iran possesses no nuclear weapons.

O’SHEA MEMO ON THE ARMENIAN ISSUE
Kevin Roderick

LA Observed, CA
April 27 2007

Editor Jim O’Shea has emailed the L.A. Times staff a response to
all the hubbub about Mark Arax and whether or not a story was killed
because of concerns that he was biased in favored of Armenian views.

O’Shea’s position is that the story was not killed, merely sent back
for more reporting. He also vows that a reporter’s ethnicity would not
be reason for being taken off a story. After O’Shea’s memo below is a
response from assistant managing editor Simon Li detailing how managing
editor Doug Frantz came to be moderating a panel in Turkey next month.

From: OShea, James Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 5:09 PM

To the Staff:

In recent days, many members of the Armenian community have registered
their concern that Managing Editor Doug Frantz killed a news story
about the Armenian genocide resolution because the writer, Mark Arax,
is of Armenian descent. I recognize the gravity of this issue and
I have taken these complaints seriously. Many staffers and readers
have written me on this issue and I felt a need to respond.

An independent internal investigation by a Los Angeles Times lawyer
from the paper’s Human Resources Department and Leo Wolinsky, a
managing editor who reports directly to me, is being completed. This is
standard practice on complaints of this nature. All of the parties
involved are being interviewed and consulted. As with any such
action involving employees, this is a confidential investigation
being conducted in complete compliance with employment laws.

However, I need to set the record straight because much of the
publicity surrounding this issue is inaccurate.

First of all, the allegation that the story was killed is not true.

Doug Frantz did place a hold on the story about a pending congressional
resolution in which the Congress would recognize as genocide the
massive deaths of Armenians at the hands of Ottoman Turks. The
editorial policy of this paper is to recognize the Armenian genocide
as a historical fact, although the Turkish government does not.

The story in question was sent back to the department from which it
emanated for additional reporting and because of concerns by Doug that
the story, as written, might be in violation of the ethics policy
of the Los Angeles Times. This was not because of the ethnicity of
the reporter but because the policy prohibits reporters from covering
stories if they have taken a position or some action that could appear
to compromise their objectivity. There is no implication here that
Armenians can’t cover the Armenian community or that other ethnic
groups can’t do likewise. In this case, the question arose over a
particular letter signed by Mark and others about the paper’s policy
on writing about the genocide.

Doug made me aware of his concerns, which is the appropriate thing
for a managing editor to do.

I agreed that we needed to resolve the conflict issue and that the
story needed further reporting on the legislative prospects for the
resolution’s success or failure, which I considered to be highly
relevant. The supervising editors then assigned a reporter who covers
Capitol Hill to report on that aspect.

In subsequent days, the Capitol Hill reporter uncovered additional
material involving the position on the resolution of House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi, reporting that elevated the story for California
readers. The story, with the new developments and the legislative
prospects for the resolution, ran on page one of the Los Angeles Times
about a week after the original was placed on hold. The original story
focused heavily on the problems that the resolution was causing for
the supporters of Israel, which was included in the revised story.

Editors showed Mark the new story with the additional reporting and he
was given the opportunity to add material or suggest changes. He did
suggest changes that were made, but he nonetheless insisted that his
by-line be removed unless the story ran as written. In the interest
of transparency, a credit line was attached noting that he contributed.

I made my decision with the best interests of the readers in mind.

The story that appeared in the newspaper was the best one.

Over the past two years, the Los Angeles Times has run 67 stories
on Armenia or Armenians, including 26 on the Armenian genocide
resolution and 13 that dealt specifically with the political fate of
the resolution. This does not include editorials, op-ed pieces and
letters to the editor. No one is trying to censor anyone. The issue
has been fully aired in the pages of this newspaper, including in
last week’s front page story reported in part by Mark.

There were problems with the ways and means by which the decisions
on this story were communicated. And while I am not going to make
public the results of any internal investigation, I can say that no
one has concluded anyone was biased in their personnel decisions.

Also, while I appreciate the strong feeling this episode has
engendered, an email campaign against any reporter or editor at
this paper will not move me to make any decisions that are unfair or
unjust. I am working diligently to resolve the issues raised by this
incident and to make sure they are clear to everyone. I will do what
I think is right.

As the editor of the newspaper, I accept responsibility for our
decisions, fully and completely.

Let me make one thing clear. I would never tolerate anyone on the
staff making decisions on a story out of a bias or because of the
ethnicity of the writer. In this case, that did not happen.

James O’Shea Editor The Los Angeles Times

Simon Li’s response, sent to LA Weekly writer Daniel Hernandez:

Daniel: May I please set the record straight on one portion of your
article about The Times, the repetition of a nasty innuendo from
Harut Sassounian’s piece urging that Managing Editor Doug Frantz be
fired over Mark Arax’s accusations.

I refer to this passage: "As Sassounian noted, Frantz is scheduled
to be back in Istanbul next month to moderate a panel for the
International Press Institute’s World Congress that is titled, "Turkey:
Sharing the Democratic Experience." Among the panelists is Andrew
Mango, who Sassounian describes as a "notorious genocide denialist."

In repeating that part of Sassounian’s unfounded implication, you
gave it credence; the more it is repeated, the more it will seem like
factual evidence of Doug’s alleged prejudice to biased, unthinking,
credulous readers.

The facts are these: As one of three vice chairmen of the International
Press Institute, I put Doug’s name forward last spring as a journalist
who might help us by taking part in the program of the organization’s
annual world congress, precisely because of his knowledge of Turkey. I
specifically suggested that we invite novelist Orhan Pamuk, who
was later awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, and ask Doug to
interview him one-on-one.

The IPI host committee in Turkey, at the strong urging of the IPI
Secretariat in Vienna, accepted the basic idea, adding another
Turkish writer Elif Shafak for the congress’ opening session. Doug
duly received an invitation to act as interviewer of these two
writers. Both of them, it’s relevant to note, have been subject to
legal action and personal threats precisely because they have written
or spoken urging their countrymen to change the majority view about
the Armenian genocide. Doug graciously agreed.

But then that panel failed to materialize, for what reasons I don’t
know. Doug agreed to moderate the opening session with a different
panel, consisting of Shafak, a Lebanese broadcaster and Shirin Ebadi,
the Iranian lawyer who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003.

Then that idea fell apart, too. I was later told that after the murder
of Armenian journalist Hrant Dink in January, both Pamuk and Shafak
had safety concerns about returning to Turkey from their temporary
domiciles abroad.

IPI then asked Doug, somewhat apologetically, whether he was still
game to moderate a panel. I believe they offered him the title of
the session in question and a description of it, without specifying
the participants. The description, incidentally, does not mention
the Armenian question.

Thus, Doug came to be moderator of this panel through a series of
accidents of the sort that any convention program planner would be
familiar with. He did not choose the topic, nor the speakers. His
role will be to facilitate the discussion. Discussion is what IPI, as
an international organization that defends and promotes journalistic
freedom, implicitly seeks to promote.

I don’t know whether Sassounian’s description of Mango is fair
or widely accepted, any more than I know anything about the three
others on the panel–the director of the Topkapi museum, a Turkish
newspaper editor and a Syrian political scientist working at a
German university. What I do know is that any innuendo that Doug is
scheduled to moderate this panel because he shares the views of any
of its participants–or the particular views of one that Sassounian
condemns-is at best reckless and at worse maliciously prejudicial.

Sincerely,

Simon K.C. Li Assistant Managing Editor Los Angeles Times

shea_memo_on_the_armenia_1.php

PRESENTATIONS OF THE ARMENIAN-NORWEGIAN ADC TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY TOOK PLACE IN YEREVAN

Mediamax News Agency, Armenia
April 27 2007

Yerevan, April 27 /Mediamax/. The presentation of the
Armenian-Norwegian Telecommunications Company "Armenian Datacom
Company" (ADC) took place in Yerevan today.

Mediamax reports that according to the Executive Director of ADC Herald
Griten, the company will be working in the sphere of provision of
ultramodern corporative network opportunities and high-speed internet
services in the Armenian capital both for the state establishments
and private companies.

President of ADC Khazhak Karayan stated that at present, $3.4mln is
invested in the company, and by the end of the year $1.5mln more is
planned to be invested. According to him, the network, installed by
the company, has no analogues not only in Armenia, but in the whole
region as well.

Khazhak Karayan stressed that the company plans to decrease the tariffs
for internet-services and the services of data transfer for 25%.

The Minister of Trade and Economic development of Armenia Karen
Chshmaritian stressed that consecutive work, directed to set up
auspicious conditions for foreign investments gave its results. The
Minister voiced hope that ADC will become one of the leading
IT-Companies of Armenia, assisting the effective activities of the
economic infrastructures of the country.

ADC was established in 2006 and is the first joint Armenian-Norwegian
company.

GOLF FEDERATION IN ARMENIA

A1+
03:36 pm] 27 April, 2007

A golf federation has opened in Armenia. The federation was officially
registered in December, 2006.

Egor Melikyan, the president of the federation, says they are
presently negotiating with the World and European federations for
further membership.

"They fully realise that Armenia is a weak country from economic point
of view and they have fixed special membership dues for us. But matter
is not fully considered."

It is noteworthy that the Armenian people have recently become
interested in golf and the number of players has significantly
increased. Golf is the most profitable sports in many developed
countries. The annual income of many players exceeds $30 million.

RA PRIME MINISTER RECEIVED THE AMBASSADOR OF CHINA

ArmRadio.am
26.04.2007 16:41

RA Prime Minister Serge Sargsyan received the Ambassador Extraordinary
and Plenipotentiary of China to Armenia Czyo Syuelian, who is
completing his diplomatic mission in our country.

On behalf of the Armenian Government the Prime Minister thanked the
Ambassador for his contribution to the development of Armenian-Chinese
ties during the five years of his tenure in office. Serge Sargsyan
expressed the willingness of the Armenian side to continue deepening
the cooperation between the two states. He underlined that during
the recent years Armenia and China have made great efforts to create
serious preconditions for the development of friendly and partnership
relations between the two countries. Ambassador Syuelian expressed
gratitude to RA Government and the Prime Minister for constant
attention and support. He characterized the Armenian-Chinese relations
as stable and dynamically developing.

During the meeting the interlocutors expressed appreciation for the
results of the sitting of the Armenian-Chinese Intergovernmental
Commission held on April 5.

At the end of the meeting RA Prime Minister Serge Sargsyan wished
success to the Ambassador of China in his further activity.

L’Armenie commemore les massacres de l’Empire Ottoman de 1915 (PAPIER GENERAL)
Par Mariam Haroutunian

Agence France Presse
24 avril 2007 mardi 2:40 PM GMT

Les Armeniens ont celebre mardi le 92ème anniversaire des massacres
commis par l’Empire Ottoman, reconnus comme genocide par une vingtaine
de pays et qui assombrissent les relations avec la Turquie voisine.

Sous une forte chute de neige, des milliers d’Armeniens se sont rendus
vers le monument a la memoire des victimes dans la capitale armenienne.

Après avoir brûle un drapeau turc sur la place de la Liberte a Erevan,
les participants ont depose des gerbes de fleurs au pied du monument
où brûle une flamme eternelle depuis 1965, date de sa construction
a une epoque où l’Armenie faisait partie de l’URSS.

De nombreux participants portaient les drapeaux des pays qui ont
reconnu le genocide.

Des responsables politiques, dont le president armenien Robert
Kotcharian, ont assiste a la ceremonie de commemoration.

"La memoire de ces actions demoniaques va toujours rester dans nos
âmes", a declare M. Kotcharian.

"La communaute internationale a pris conscience que le genocide n’est
pas seulement un crime contre un peuple en particulier, mais contre
l’humanite, et qu’un deni et une dissimulation d’un tel crime sont
aussi dangereux que sa preparation et son execution", a estime M.
Kotcharian.

Comme chaque annee, de nombreux membres de la diaspora armenienne se
sont rendus a Erevan pour prendre part a la marche.

Parmi eux, il y avait la realisatrice americaine d’origine armenienne,
Carla Garapedian, qui tourne "Screamers" (les hurleurs), un film
documentaire contre le negationnisme du genocide armenien et de tous
les genocides.

"Je sais que la Turquie veut rejoindre l’Union europeenne. Ils doivent
s’excuser, dire +nous avons fait une enorme erreur et nous en sommes
desoles+", a declare Mme Garapedian a l’AFP.

Hrant Gazarian, 24 ans, est arrive de Turquie pour deposer une gerbe
au pied du monument, en l’honneur de Hrant Dink, un journaliste turc
d’origine armenienne abattu en janvier a Istanbul.

"Cela fait 100 jours et ceux qui sont derrière ce meurtre ne sont
toujours pas identifies et punis (…) La Turquie doit reconnaître
le genocide, afin qu’il n’y ait plus de victimes, comme Dink", dit
Hrant Gazarian.

Les massacres et deportations d’Armeniens de 1915 a 1917 ont fait
plus de 1,5 million de morts selon les Armeniens, 250.000 a 500.000
selon la Turquie, qui recuse categoriquement la notion de genocide.

Erevan et Ankara n’ont aucune relation diplomatique en raison de ce
differend. Cette question complique egalement les negociations de la
Turquie pour son entree au sein de l’Union europeenne.

Plus de 20 pays ont officiellement reconnu les tueries commises
entre 1915 et 1917 comme un genocide, dont la Belgique, le Canada,
le Pologne, la Russie, la Suisse et la France.

Mais des puissances comme la Grande-Bretagne et les Etats-Unis refusent
d’utiliser ce terme, soucieuses de garder de bonnes relations avec
la Turquie.

Israël, qui a des liens très proches avec la Turquie, un des rares pays
musulmans avec lequel il a des relations diplomatiques, a rejete en
mars une motion reconnaissant implicitement la realite d’un genocide
armenien.

La Turquie a suspendu sa cooperation militaire avec la France en
novembre, en raison de l’adoption par l’Assemblee nationale francaise
d’une proposition de loi reprimant la negation du genocide armenien.

–Boundary_(ID_OaZuNu92OzFgI6BWUz7w6A)- –

ACCEPTING TURKEY EU WILL HAVE TO ACCEPT LEBANON, ISRAEL, AND MAGRIB, SARKOZY SAYS

PanARMENIAN.Net
25.04.2007 15:58 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "Let me tell you the truth: I am against Turkish
EU membership," French presidential contender Nikolas Sarkozy said
in a letter which was sent to the Armenian Foundations Coordination
Council. "The real problem lies with Turkey; I cannot tell young
French school students that Europe’s borders lie along Syria and
Iraq. If we accept Turkey then, putting aside the Ukraine for a
moment, we have to accept Lebanon, Israel, and the Magrib. If Europe
really wants to give off a sense of security, then its borders must
be defined. We should deepen our relations with Turkey, but not to
the point of EU membership. What we need is an urgent declaration of
‘privileged partnership’ with Turkey…" the letter says.

ARMENIA TO BECOME AN EXPORTER OF URANIUM
By A. Martirosian

AZG Armenian Daily
26/04/2007

Economy. Russia-Armenia Relations

An agreement between Armenia and Russia about research and exploitation
of uranium deposits in Armenia shall radically change the status
of Armenia worldwide, stated yesterday Nature Protection Minister
Vardan Ayvazian and head of Nuclear Energy Department of the Russian
Federation Sergey Kiriyenko.

Mr. Kiriyenko said that his optimism is based upon the agreement
between the Armenian and Russian Presidents in Sochi. He also
informed that a major part of the research works on the Armenian
Uranium deposits has already been done. According to the research
of USSR experts, about 30 thousand tons of Uranium are stored in
the deposits of Armenia. Mr. Kiriyenko assured that more intensive
research may reveal 150-200% of Uranium previously detected.

The expertise is to be finished by the end of 2007. After that a joint
Russian-Armenian enterprise shall be established so as to start the
exploitation of the deposits. Armenia most probably will join the new
Nuclear Energy Center, founded by Russia and Kazakhstan. This will
give Armenia opportunity of becoming a producer of nuclear energy
and an exporter of Uranium.

Referring to the issue of the Armenian Atomic Power Plant, the head of
the Russian Nuclear Energy Department said that it can work properly
until the appointed date – 2016. As 2016 is already drawing near,
Armenia should think about constructing a new Atomic Power Plant,
he said. On behalf of the Russian Government he suggested Armenia to
undertake teh construction of the new power plant with output equal
to that of the present one.

Nature Protection Minister of Armenia Vardan Ayvazian said that
the excavation and processing of Uranium in Armenia will surely
encourage the Government about the construction of a new power
plant. Mr. Kiriyenko noted that even Russia, possessing large resources
of oil and gas, is still enhancing its nuclear power system, therefore
Armenia, being deprived of oil, should to the best to start its own
nuclear power program.