Author: Nahapetian Samvel

DeFacto Agency, Armenia
Nov 10 2006
NKR PARLIAMENT SPEAKER URGED YOUTH TO MORE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN
THE REFERENDUM’S PREPARATION
On the eve of the World Youth Day the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic
National Assembly Head Ashot Gulian received the representatives of
the Republic youth organizations.
Having congratulated the meeting’s participants and the Republic’s
youth as a whole, the Speaker mentioned the importance of the role
and significance of the youth organizations in the civil society’s
construction and the democratic principles’ establishment in the
various spheres of the country’s vital activity.
According to the Speaker, the Republic leadership, including the
legislative organ, is ready to promote the process of formation of
the country’s youth field.
Ashot Gulian answered numerous questions referring to strengthening
state control over the new generation’s spiritual upbringing,
ensuring the youth’s employment, improving the young families’ living
conditions and establishment of the youth parliament in the NKR.
The Karabakh Parliament Head urged the youth’s representatives to
more actively participate in the preparation and propaganda of a
referendum on the NKR Draft Constitution, the NKR MFA Press Centre
reports.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION REPORT ON TURKEY FAILS TO REFLECT ARMENIAN ISSUES
PanARMENIAN.Net
09.11.2006 17:45 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ This Wednesday, November 8th, the European Commission
released its regular report on Turkey. The political dimension of
the negotiation process has been removed from this document and is
now included in a second report, entitled, “Enlargement strategy and
the and Main Challenges 2006-2007.” As for the Armenian issues, it
should be noted that the regular report failed to denounce the denial
campaign waged by Turkey, both on its own territory and throughout
the Union. Previous mentions of the Genocide in previous reports –
characterized euphemistically as “tragic events” – were not reflected
in this new document. On freedom of speech, only Article 301 of the
Turkish penal code was mentioned. The European Commission failed
to denounce the other provisions of Turkish law aimed at freedom of
speech, especially Article 305, which penalizes the affirmation of
the Armenian Genocide. Finally, in the technical chapters related to
the Acquis Communautaire, the illegal blockade of Armenia is described
using the dismissive terminology, “closed border.”
The European Armenian Federation is troubled by the Commission’s
failure to fairly and meaningfully address Armenian issues,
particularly the issue of Turkey’s denial of the Armenian
Genocide. “The Commission’s report, most notably it failure to
challenge Turkey’s many restrictions of freedom of speech, represents a
true setback in terms of the credibility of this European institution,
particularly in light of its eagerness to criticize France for its
law penalizing the denial of the Armenian genocide,” stated Hilda
Tchoboian, the Chairperson of the European Armenian Federation.
The Federation announced that the European citizens it represents
expect the Commission to fairly and honestly perform its task of
accurately assessing Turkey’s progress, without bowing to political
pressures. Otherwise, European public opinion will turn against the
Commission’s double standards,” added Tchoboian. The Federation also
denounces the arrogance of the Turkish leaders who attempt to force
Europe to abandon its values. “The talks over Turkey’s candidacy
have devolved from a negotiation into a race to see which side can
walk away from European values,” she concluded, reports the EAFJD
communication unit.

HEIRS OF VICTIMS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION OF ABOUT $8 MILLION
By Aghavni Harutyunian
AZG Armenian Daily
10/11/2006
This week, the heirs of the victims of the Armenian Genocide
will receive about $8 million of compensation from New York Life
insurance company. According to the press release disseminated by the
company, about 2500 people will get $7 million 954 thousand 362. This
compensation sum will amount to $10 million as a result of the court
investigation instituted since 1999. Besides, about $3 million were
already sent to various Armenian benevolence organizations.
According to the geography, the heirs dwelling in Armenia will
receive about $3,7 million, the American-Armenians will get $2,7
million of compensations, while the French Armenians will get about
$650 thousand. In general, Armenians dwelling in 26 countries will
get the compensations.

KAREL DE GUCHT HAS CERTAIN SUGGESTIONS ON THE SETTLEMENT OF THE KARABAKH ISSUE
Public Radio, Armenia
Nov 7 2006
“Unfortunately, this year no practical progress was achieved in the
negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and correspondingly
these yielded no results,” OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Belgian Foreign
Minister Karel de Gucht told “Zerkalo” newspaper.
According to the source, at the same time the OSCE leader reminded
about the upcoming visit of the Azeri President Ilham Aliev to Belgia,
during which ways of resolution of the Karabakh conflict will be
discussed. “This meeting will precede the talks between Foreign
Ministers Oskanian and Mammadyarov scheduled mid-November. As for me,
I have certain suggestions regarding the forthcoming meeting, but I
will not make these public now, since my personal opinion may impact
the development of events. However, I anticipate positive outcome
of the talks and I think that these will be more productive than the
previous ones,” Karel de Gucht declared.

OPENING BORDERS BETWEEN TURKEY AND ARMENIA IS IMPOSSIBLE UNDER PRESENT SITUATION – HEAD OF IGDIR MUNICIPALITY
Author: E.Huseynov
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Nov 8 2006
Opening the borders between Turkey and Armenia is impossible under
the present situation, the Head of the Igdir Municipality of Turkey,
Nurettin Aras, stated in an exclusive interview with Trend.
According to him, the European Union (EU) member-countries insist
on opening the Turkish-Armenian borders. “There are no relations
between Turkey’s entrance to the European Union and the opening of
the borders with Armenia, and it does not reflect within the Helsinki
Charter. However, the EU Head and member-countries are constantly
pressurizing Turkey on this issue and calls for its borders to open.
This matter is touched upon at each level and the pressure is
unavoidable,” Aras said. He stressed that recently, a number of
countries put this question as a condition for Turkey’s entrance into
the European Union. “Will the borders be opened as a result of these
pressures? Never!!! The Turkish Constitution does not allow it,”
he added.
According to Aras, to open the Turkish-Armenian borders it needs
not only to recognize the existing borders, but also Armenia should
improve its relations with Azerbaijan, as well as open the transport
route to Baku.
Aras positively assessed the initiatives to open a transit
corridor between Turkey, Azerbaijan and Iran via Nakchivan
Autonomous Republic. “Together with the opening of the rail link
Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku, there is no reason not to support the
construction of the railway stretches to Iran through Nakchivan. It
will be of mutual benefit. Consequently, the Silk Route will develop,”
Aras concluded.

PRESS RELEASE
ARMENPAC, The Armenian-American Political Action Committee
421 E. Airport Freeway, Suite 201
Irving, Texas 75220
Contact: Jason P. Capizzi, Esq.
Tel: (972) 635-5347
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:
ARMENPAC LEADS THE WAY BY SPONSORING NATIONWIDE EVENTS IN SUPPORT OF
REPRESENTATIVE KNOLLENBERG
Irving, TX – ARMENPAC recently shepherded Armenian-Americans across
the nation to gather in support of Representative Joe Knollenberg’s
(R-MI) reelection campaign at two very successful fundraisers hosted
in the Detroit, Michigan and Boston, Massachusetts areas. Members of
the local communities as well as several prominent Armenian-American
leaders were in attendance at both events. “ARMENPAC applauds the
Boston and Detroit communities for their financial commitments in
support of Representative Knollenberg. ARMENPAC also received many
contributions in support of Representative Knollenberg from the
Armenian-American community across the nation, and would like to
thank those from California to Florida who generously supported this
fundraising effort,” said ARMENPAC Co-Chair Edgar Hagopian.
Representative Knollenberg’s record on Armenian-American issues is
unparalleled. Most notably, he serves as one of the Co-Chairs of the
Congressional Caucus of Armenian Issues. Throughout his tenure in this
post, Representative Knollenberg has been instrumental in advocating
for Genocide affirmation and increased foreign aid to Armenia, in
addition to other legislative initiatives aimed at ensuring the
future stability and prosperity of the Republics of Armenia and
Nagorno Karabakh.
Representative Knollenberg represents Michigan’s ninth Congressional
district, as well as the interests of every Armenian-American across
the nation. In addition to his commitment to the Armenian Caucus,
Representative Knollenberg is a member of the powerful Appropriations
Committee, which is responsible for, among other things, determining
how much foreign aid to grant foreign countries. As Chairman of
the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and
Housing and Urban Development, Representative Knollenberg is dubbed a
Cardinal among his colleagues in the House of Representatives. Thus,
Representative Knollenberg’s reelection is critical to the Armenian
community, both here in the United States as well as in Armenia and
Nagorno Karabakh. “Representative Knollenberg’s dedication to the
Armenian cause is supreme. He is a true champion of all Armenians
and we must do all that we can to ensure that he remains in office in
order to carry on his mission,” said ARMENPAC Co-Chair Edgar Hagopian.
ARMENPAC recognizes and appreciates the great effort of those who
helped organize this national fundraising effort, namely Raffi and
Nina Festekjian (MA) and Tom and Debbie Krikorian (MI) who volunteered
their beautiful homes as venues for each event. ARMENPAC is also
grateful to the individual Co-Hosts of this fundraising effort,
including Dr. Noubar Afeyan (MA), Mr. Bryan Ardouny (VA), Mr.
Robert Avakian (MA), Mr. Gregory and Anita Boyajian (MI), Mr. Gerard
and Cleo Cafesjian (MN), Mr. George and Flora Dunaians (CA), ARMENPAC
Co-Chair Edgar and Sarah Hagopian (MI), Ms. Lucine Hartunian (MI),
ARMENPAC Board Member Jirair and Elizabeth Hovnanian (NJ), Mr.
Gregory and Sandra Jamian (MI), Mr. Aram Kaloosdian (MA), Mr. George
and Grace Kay (CA), ARMENPAC Treasurer Dr. Sarkis and Ida Kechejian
(TX), Mrs. Michael Ohanian (MA), Mr. Joe and Joyce Stein (CA), Mr.
Charles Talanian (MA), and Mr. Chuck and Tulie Yessaian (MI).
Both fundraising events were a tremendous success as well as a
wonderful opportunity for the Armenian-American community to show its
gratitude for Representative Knollenberg’s leadership. “ARMENPAC is
confident that with the support of the Armenian-American community,
Representative Knollenberg will succeed in his reelection campaign,”
said ARMENPAC Executive Director Jason Capizzi.
ARMENPAC is an independent, bipartisan political action committee
with a nationwide membership. ARMENPAC raises awareness of,
and advocates for, policies that help create peace, security and
stability in the Caucasus region. ARMENPAC provides financial support
to federal officeholders, candidates, political action committees
and organizations that actively support issues of importance to
Armenian-Americans. For more information and how to join ARMENPAC,
please call (877) 286-1046 or visit
###

ARMENIA SURRENDERS TO RUSSIA…
Fikret Ertan
Zaman Online, Turkey
Nov 6 2006
Georgia is not pleased with its dependence on its enemy, Russia,
for natural gas; neither is Armenia which is Russia’s ally.
As a matter of fact, both countries are looking for alternative
natural gas sources. In this context, Georgia is holding meetings
with Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Iran. And Armenia believes that the
Iran-Armenia natural gas pipeline, still under construction over the
last several years, would curb its dependence on Russia.
The construction of this natural gas pipeline started in 2004 after
an agreement between Armenia and Iran’s national natural gas company,
NIGC. The pipeline which starts from the vicinity of the Iranian
city of Tabriz, will end in the Iran-Armenia border and then will be
linked to Armenia’s own natural gas pipeline. Forty kilometers of the
160-kilometer pipeline, extending from Kacaran to Mergi, is expected to
be completed next month. The second part of the pipeline, which extends
to Armenia’s Ararat region, will be completed in 2007 and is expected
to be linked to the existing ArmRosGazprom (ARG) pipeline there.
As the name suggests, ARG is a joint natural gas pipeline project.
Until early November, Armenia owned 45 percent of this pipeline,
Russian natural gas giant Gazprom 45 percent and the remaining 10
percent belonged to an obscure intermediary company called ITERA.
However, the percentage of shares has changed after a deal between
Armenia and Gazprom in early November.
According to the agreement reached early this month during Armenian
President Robert Kocharyan’s visit to Moscow, Armenia increased its
shares in the ARG Company from 45 percent to 58 percent. This increase
took place after ARG announced new shares amounting to $119 million
and Gazprom bought these shares. With these new shares, Gazprom has
effectively taken control of the 5th unit of the Hirazdan electricity
plant along with the Iran-Armenian natural gas pipeline.
The basis of this recent development lay in the agreement signed
between Armenia and Gazprom in April 2006. Under the deal, Gazprom
raised the natural gas price for its ally, Armenia, from the
preferential $54 per 1,000 cubic meters to the still preferential
$110 per 1,000 cubic meters, which will remain in force until Jan. 1,
2009. This in fact was a favorable price for Armenia, which is highly
dependent on Russia for natural gas.
However, there was a price to Russia’s compromise. In return, Russia
demanded concessions from Armenia as regards the acquisition of the
Iran-Armenia pipeline and the 5th unit of the Hrazdan electricity
generating plant. Russia particularly insisted on limiting the
Iran-Armenia pipeline’s diameter to 700 millimeters instead of 1.420
millimeters as stipulated in the original agreement reached with
Iran. The reason is obvious. Russia was trying to block the transfer of
Iranian natural gas via Armenia to Georgia and Ukraine in particular,
and to Europe through the Black Sea, by keeping the diameter of
the pipeline limited. The recent deal and latest news reports show
that Russia achieved its goal and prevented use of the Iran-Armenia
pipeline for the transfer of natural gas to other countries.
Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan defended the recent
agreement and said it would be illogical to have a separate ownership
for the Iran-Armenia pipeline since Gazprom already controlled natural
gas supply in Armenia, thereby trying to rationalize the deal.
This recent deal I have dwelled upon is a geo-political achievement
for Russia (thanks to this deal Russia has limited the potential
significance of the Iran-Armenia pipeline in the future) while sealing
Armenia’s dependence on Gazprom, and consequently on Russia.
This is the picture the recent geo-political success of Russia,
using its natural gas card.

REGULAR INTRIGUE
Aram Abrahamian
Aravot, Armenia
Nov 3 2006
If our nowadays authorities have omitted in several political and
economic fields, we may surely say that they are excellent in carrying
on intrigues and gossips. In comparison with them Machiavellian
was simply a child of nursery school. It is known that the lack of
intellect is made up by slyness, and the sly ruler can swindle easily
a dozen officials.
Slyness considers some settlements, which assist in strengthening the
authority. What is easier; to raise the minimal salary, for example,
100 thousand Drams to provide people’s dignified life or not to allow
any TV Company to tell about the real life. If you can’t subdue the
truth, you subdue the mirror, which reflects it. Or what is easier
to form a vital political system where the projects and ideas will
rival or to destroy opposition parties with the help of intrigues to
make the selection among 2,5 pro-authority groups. The first isn’t
only difficult but it isn’t also profitable for the authorities.
The representatives of the ruling clique know very well the power
of human small passion: vanity and mercenariness and they use that
power to destroy the parties. Communist Party and NDU were destroyed
in that way, which was a serious blow to the political system
of Armenia. Communist Party is a party with its ideology and that
ideology was capable to unify certain strata of our society. Nowadays
communistic parties have no power. And the separation of NDU Party
caused to the fact that one of our famous politicians; Vaszgen
Manoukian is produced as expert who make right analyses but not as
the leader of political power.
Now it’s time for Constitutional Right Union. The explanations of
both sides aren’t complete and it is difficult to understand what they
want. But it is obvious that the current situation is profitable for
the authorities.
I didn’t speak about it if “Iravunq” newspaper, one of the oldest and
popular newspaper of Armenia wouldn’t find itself under danger. I’d
like our partners to solve this problem and don’t include this dispute
in the inter party dispute. All readers and our press will only gain.

REFERENDUM ON NKR CONSTITUTION SCHEDULED IN DECEMBER
PanARMENIAN.Net
02.11.2006 17:00 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The NKR National Assembly has adopted the NKR draft
Constitution at the plenary session on the second reading. The draft
was adopted with the support of overwhelming majority, one against
and one abstained. The MPs also decided to provide the document for
a nation-wide vote scheduled December 10.
The draft specifically notes that the NKR is a sovereign, democratic,
legal, social state. The names NKR and Artsakh are identical. The
power belongs to the people, who exercise their power via elections,
referendums, etc. The state ensures basic human and civil rights and
liberties. Before restoration of the unity of the state territory
of the NKR and specification of the borders the public authorities
is executed on the territory under the NKR jurisdiction in fact,
reports IA Regnum.

CRIMINALIZING DEBATE: FRANCE ABANDONS MODERNITY
by Hilal Elver And Richard Falk
Zaman, Turkey
Nov 2 2006
There is a sense of absurdity surrounding the vote in October at the
French Assembly to criminalize a denial of Armenian genocide that
supposedly took place during the final stage of Ottoman rule in 1915.
The absurdity does not arise from a description of these events,
but from the idea that a correct view of history can be legislated,
and dissenter punished as criminals. True only 106 of 577 deputies in
the Assembly voted in favor of the bill, 19 opposed, and 4 abstained,
while 448 did not vote at all. No one expects this bill to become
law. The French Senate has sent signals that it will never consider
the proposed law, and the President Chirac has expressed his personal
opposition. The idea behind the bill was to impose a fine of up to
45,000 Euros and send the denier to jail for as long as a year.
But why would the 448 deputies refuse to oppose formally such a
piece of legislation? We will never know their motives, but it seems
reasonable to suspect that they recognized the absurdity of such
a legislative move, but at the same time did not want to offend the
500,000 Armenians living in France whose leaders had strongly supported
the law. Also, it allows these French politicians an indirect means
of signaling their opposition to any future move to invite Turkey to
become a member of the European Union.
To punish deniers of the Armenian experience seems in one sense a
logical sequel to punishing Holocaust deniers, which can actually
happen in at least 12 European countries. Apparently, at this time the
historian, David Irving, is serving prison time in Austria for a speech
made 17 years before he was indicted that was held in a court to deny
the Holocaust. Two distinct issues are raised: Is it acceptable to make
it a crime to deny the Holocaust? Should Armenian grievances be treated
any less seriously than Jewish grievances when it comes to denial?
The rationale for punishing Holocaust deniers relates to some
legitimate European concerns. There are claims made that the denial
of the Holocaust risks giving rise to a new wave of anti-semitism.
The evidence that there exists any link between asserting denial
and practicing anti-semitism seems far too weak at this point to
justify criminalization even in European countries with their shameful
history of persecuting Jews. Vigilance is understandable given the
existence of scary neo-Nazi movements that have emerged in several
European countries. Instead of criminalizing denial, to discourage
anti-semitism it would be far more effective for the governments in
these countries to press hard for a just solution to the ordeal of
the Palestinian people.
On the historical argument in favor of ‘denial’ there is significantly
less clarity about the genocidal character of the Armenian claims as
compared to the factual reality of the Holocaust.
There is remains a widely shared refusal on the part of the majority of
Turks to categorize the events of 1915 as ‘genocide.’ This Turkish
outlook has enjoyed some support among prominent non-Turkish
historians, most notably Bernard Lewis. At the same time, the
overwhelming weight of international historical scholarship does
endorse the main thrust of Armenian claims. Additionally, Lewis’
assessment is somewhat undermined by his close relationship with
the Turkish government while revising his influential history of
modern Turkey. It is a matter of social reality that informed opinion
outside of Turkey does support the Armenian position about the events
in 1915, but that hardly makes the case for the punishment of those
who disagree.
The Turkish relationship to the denial of history has similarities to
this French approach, yet it is significantly different. Turkey, in a
sense anticipated the tactic of the French Assembly, by enacting its
notorious ‘301’ law that punishes statements that insult Turkishness,
which covers a potentially wide range of viewpoints that could be
regarded as anti-Turkish by ultra-nationalist state prosecutors.
Recent high profile prosecutions of famous writers Orhan Pamuk and
Elif Shafak, while dismissed, have led to widespread international [and
national] criticism of such interferences with freedom of expression. A
hopeful development is that Turkey’s highest officials have let it
be known that they did not approve of these 301 prosecutions, and
even made public their sympathy with the prominent targets of these
indictments, Although dangers persist, and some disturbing prosecutions
of journalists and public figures continue to occur, and have even
led to imprisonment, Turkish public opinion seems to be moving
gradually against such restrictions of freedom of expression. This
display of greater Turkish self-confidence is more accepting of
viewpoints that might formerly have been treated as hostile to
Turkish nationalism. Turkey is a relatively young country that is
still in the midst of making its own very distinctive transition to
modernity. Perhaps as much as any country Turkey is struggling to
gain the benefits of modernity without sacrificing the achievements,
memories, and glories of its past.
But what is becoming of France, formerly the greatest inspiration
throughout the world for equality of rights and universal democratic
culture associated with modernity. It was the French Revolution in
1789 that remains the decisive moment for an emancipatory alternative
to oppressive and autocratic government. In this French revolutionary
moment nothing was more central than the idea that human progress and
prosperity depended on freedom of thought and expression. The pride
of the French nation linked this openness to a variety of opinions on
the controversial issues of the day, and there was no anxiety that a
tension existed between a robust French nationalism and the affirmation
of unrestricted cultural freedom. So how should we interpret this
seeming French retreat from its own proudest contributions to modern
social and political life?
Of course, it would be a mistake to exaggerate this act of the
French Assembly, which is really more a gesture than a rupture. At
the same time, it does reflect the regressive side of French political
identity. In the background of such anti-democratic impulses, we think,
are the current threats to French public order that conservative
opinion blames on immigrant minorities. There are disturbing signs
that racist attitudes are gaining the upper hand in French society. In
such a setting, the Armenian issue becomes a vehicle for anti-Islamic
and anti-Turkish sentiments. Of course, there is also an obvious
opportunistic dimension that relates to French electoral politics, but
challenging Turkish refusal to acknowledge crimes against the Armenians
is also useful as a way of indirectly raising doubts about whether
Turkey will ever deserve to be a member of the European Union. It
is against this background that the peculiarity of non-voting by the
majority of the French Assembly needs to be primarily understood. In
effect, the punishment of deniers of Armenian genocide is too crude
an assault on freedom of thought to be an acceptable tactic even by
those who oppose Turkish EU membership, yet to vote against this bill
might seem to exempt Turkey from censure for its refusal to admit
that the 1915 massacres were, in fact, genocide, and would anger the
well-organized Armenian pressure groups that have so enthusiastically
backed this initiative.
Two main conclusions arise from these controversies: the futility
of legislating historical reality; and the importance of coming
to terms with historic injustices that give rise to pain, anger,
and ethnic tensions. How should Turkey now address the grievances
of the Armenians relating to the events of 1915? Is it important
to construct a new Turkish approach to this tormented past by
launching an independent inquiry that is freed from nationalistic
bias? It may be that the efforts of Pamuk and Shafak are hesitant
moves in this direction, aimed at helping the people of Turkey to
think more objectively about this contested part of their past for
the sake of Turkish national interests, so that the country can move
on. Under the best of circumstances it will be certainly impossible
to reach an accommodation with the most embittered among the Armenian
diaspora or to persuade extreme Turkish nationalists to reexamine the
Armenian grievances in an objective spirit. A serious Turkish effort
to explore the issue, aimed at achieving closure in good faith, is
likely to improve the overall international atmosphere with respect
to Turkey. It would also be a convincing demonstration that Turkey
is prepared to accept internal debate and controversy. Such moves
would be further evidence of the deepening of Turkish democracy. A
process of inquiry and reflection on such an inflamed subject will
not be easy, as extremists on both sides will do all in their power
to avoid a reasonable historical reckoning. But it will also not be
easy to go on pretending that there is no unfinished business arising
from this bloody Armenian encounter. Why not seize upon this French
abandonment of modernity to risk this Turkish affirmation of the
moral and political energies of change?