Author: Nahapetian Samvel

Babacan’s Performance
Zaman, Turkey
July 19 2005
Brussels that has recently learned the correct pronunciation of Babacan
finally had the opportunity to listen to Turkey’s chief negotiator in
length after months of waiting. The same goes for the Turkish press
in Brussels as Babacan, establishing a timid relationship with the
press so far, does not enjoy holding press meetings.
It was only natural that his address to the European Parliament (EP),
that has been the fiercest critic of Turkey, would attract a great
deal of attention when Ankara was only 2.5 months away from starting
accession talks. The chief negotiator of a country whose prospective
and possible membership would change almost all the parameters of
the European Union (EU) has been eagerly awaited. Lots of wise men
who rightfully think the question of what direction EU would take in
the wake of constitutional rejections in France and the Netherlands
would be clarified in the answer to be given for Turkey’s membership,
had taken their seats in the EP to listen to Babacan.
To cut a long story short, Brussels found Babacan as “uneasy”. Being
unable to deliver his speech with a dynamic English, extending
some of his answers unnecessarily, giving the impression he was not
well-prepared for some of the questions and speaking as a serious
bureaucrat instead of incorporating humor in his speech have made
Bruxelloise grade Babacan between “mediocre” and “could pass only
with the teacher’s assent”.
It is necessary to classify the criticisms about Babacan in two groups:
Those in the first group are the supporters of Turkey’s membership
while those in the second group are fierce opponents of Turkey’s
accession who would even criticize the late Osman Bolukbasi if he
was in Babacan’s place. I will return to the second group but let me
underline that the ones who should be taken seriously are of course
those in the first group.
According to the ones in the first group, Babacan received an
“average” grade, but he should improve himself rapidly, hasten his
speech and prove that he is competent not only in Turkey’s issues but
those of the EU as well. The thorniest issues between Turkey and EU
are those of political ones. He should enrich his knowledge on the
Kurdish and Armenian issue, the minorities and religious foundations.
About the Armenian issue, going beyond answers like, “We suggested
a joint commission,” he should equip himself in a manner that he
could come up with arguments considering the historical background
of the case and from time to time bring up the deficient attitude of
the West. Babacan’s most affirmative attitude, which impressed this
group, was his sobriety which he kept even when he was answering to
provocative questions. This group agrees that the one who would carry
out Turkey’s negotiations should be able to master his nerves and does
not concede on his sobriety. Of course, along with criticisms, they
appreciate Babacan’s success in his educational life and his actions
as the minister responsible for the economy. They are optimistic
that Babacan will beat his deficiencies in a short time taking into
consideration of his fast learning capacity.
The second group, which criticizes Babacan are the Christian
Democrats who want Turkey to accept their “privileged partnership”
proposal. They made nonsensical remarks after Babacan’s trip. They
stated that Babacan’s comment that privileged partnership was something
implausible for Turkey was very unfortunate. Going further, one of the
Christian Democrats- Renate Sommer -argued that Turkey would have to
accept the privileged partnership proposal meaning that “do not waste
our time”. There is no way one can take these criticisms seriously.

Deputy Foreign Minister dismisses reports on referendum
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 19 2005
Baku, July 18, AssA-Irada — Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov has
dismissed reports on the determination of the Upper Garabagh status
through referendum. The status will be determined jointly by all of
its population after Azerbaijanis return home, he said.
“Azerbaijan’s current laws forbid holding a referendum in any part of
the country. Therefore, the reports on the status determination through
a referendum contradict reality”, he told a news conference on Monday.
Azimov said that in general, the issue is not on discussion at this
point, as Azerbaijanis must return home and peace be restored first.
For this to be possible, however, the occupied territories must be
freed and communications restored, he said.
“Only after this the status may be discussed in a peaceful
environment. Such discussions should be in line with Azerbaijan’s
laws and Constitution.” Azimov pointed out that in determining the
status of Garabagh, the views of its Azerbaijani community should
be definitely considered and the issue ‘cannot be solved by a simple
majority of votes’.
The Deputy Foreign Minister also said that there have been some reports
that the conflicting sides reached certain agreements on some issues
that were not even discussed. “There have been some speculations
aimed at disrupting peace talks”, he said.
Azimov noted that Azerbaijan will not give up the Lachin corridor
for the sake of Armenian residents’ ties with Armenia.
“Upper Garabagh Armenians currently use the city of Lachin as a link
to Armenia. They will be able to use this route after a peace accord
is signed as well. But Azerbaijan cannot give up the Lachin District
for the sake of Upper Garabagh Armenians’ establishing ties with
Armenia.” Azimov said that Azerbaijan proposes a different route that
goes through Azerbaijani territories and would ensure the security
of Armenian residents.
The negotiations are focusing on Armenia’s withdrawal from the seven
regions around Upper Garabagh. The issue has not been completely
agreed upon yet, he said.
The Deputy Foreign Minister dismissed reports suggesting that the
return of only five regions is being discussed.
Azimov did not specify when the peace talks will yield results.
“If Armenia agrees to pull out from the occupied land today, the
conflict will be resolved.” The Deputy Foreign Minister said that
the patience of Azerbaijan, which gives preference to settling the
conflict in peace, is exhausted. “It is difficult to cite a specific
timing for the conflict resolution”, he said.
He declined to comment on the recent statement by the US co-chair of
the mediating OSCE Minsk Group Steven Mann concerning the timeframe
for conflict settlement.
Mann told a recent news conference in Yerevan that the conflict may
be resolved ‘either this year of in 100 years’ and that the issue
depends on the heads of state as well as the two peoples.
Azimov also said that it is premature to expect signing of any
agreement at the meeting of Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents Ilham
Aliyev and Robert Kocharian in Kazan, Russia on August 26.
The results of the Presidents’ meeting will depend on the meeting of
the foreign ministers on August 23, said Azimov.
“If positive results are achieved at the ministers’ meeting, the
Presidents’ meeting will be beneficial as well.” The Deputy Foreign
Minister expressed a hope that the foreign ministers’ meeting will
form a ‘positive basis’ for the presidents’ talks. The positions of
the sides are unlikely to draw closer if the ministers do not reach
an agreement, he added.*
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian International Policy Research Group
P.O. Box 28179
Washington, DC 20038-9998
Contact: Armine Khachatryan
Tel: (202) 473-0348
Fax: (202) 589-8605
E-mail: [email protected]
July 18, 2005
Subject: FOURTH ANNUAL AIPRG CONFERENCE-CALL FOR PAPERS
Armenia: Public Sector Governance and Economic Efficiency
Contact: Mr. Armine Khachatryan at
[email protected]
The Armenian International Policy Research Group is pleased to
announce that its Fourth Annual conference”Armenia: Public Sector
Governance and Economic Efficiency” will be held on January 14-15,
2006, at the World Bank headquarters in Washington, DC. While the
focus of this year’s conference will be on the issues related to
public sector’s role in influencing productivity and growth, papers
from all areas of relevance for economic development and growth are
welcome. References should be made to the following broadly defined
topics:
Institutional Reforms and Governance
Fiscal Policy and Tax Administration
Regulatory Reforms and Business Climate
Trade and Regional Cooperation
Geopolitics and International Law
Social Sector Reforms (Education, Health, and Social Security)
Banking and Finance
Diaspora’s Role and Channels of Involvement
Prospective authors should email abstracts to
[email protected] by September 16, 2005. The
Selection Committee will notify authors of accepted abstracts by
October 1, 2005. The deadline for the submission of completed papers
is December 16, 2005.
Applications for stand-alone sessions will be accepted as long as
they are consistent with the format of AIPRG conferences (i.e., 2
papers plus 2 discussants for regular sessions or 3-4 short papers
for discussion sessions). Select papers will be considered for
publication in the Armenian Journal of Public Policy. The final
agenda along with the list of confirmed papers will be circulated by
December 30, 2005. The official language of the conference is
English. For more information on the AIPRG please visit

CONSTRUCTED ARMENIAN CHURCH AND ARMENIAN-RUSSIAN FRIENDSHIP MONUMENT
DEFACED IN BUDYONOVSK, RUSSIA
KRASNODAR, JULY 18. ARMINFO. Vandals set on fire the constructed
Armenian church and defaced the Armenian-Russian Friendship monument
in the Russian town of Budyonovsk, reports Erkramas.
The monument to the Fathers – Founders of the Holy Cross Town was
inaugurated Oct 17 2004.
The first attack was made in Feb 2005: the plaque “1799-2004” and the
“Holy Cross” inscription were torn off from the monument. Recently
the vandals came again breaking the lamps, damaging the cross stone
and leaving a dead cat under the arch. July 16 the vandals set on
fire the fence round the church. The fire was quickly put out.
This all may be done to aggravate ethnic relations in Budyonovsk as
the monument is regarded in the town as token of Armenian-Russian
friendship. “So we are indignant at the inaction of the local police
for who it seems to be easier to find and deport labor emigrants
from Armenia than to catch real criminals,” says the chief editor of
Yerkramas Tigran Tavadyan.
Budyonovsk (Subr Khach (Holy Cross)) was founded in 1799 by Armenians
from Karabakh who were given a charter by Russian Emperor Paul I.-0

ARMENIAN JOURNALISTS AND DIPLOMATS PLAYED IN DRAW
PanArmenian News Network
July 18 2005
18.07.2005 03:47
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ On the occasion of the 10-th anniversary of the
Yerevan Press Club the teams of journalists and diplomats (composed
of the members of RA Foreign Ministry and Embassies of some states)
played a friendly football match, IA Regnum reports. The status of
friendly match perfectly reflected on the outcome. The match ended
in a draw 3:3. The match proceeded in a tense and non-compromise
atmosphere. After the first period the journalist were leading 2:0,
however in the second period the diplomats activated and scored three
goals. As result the journalists launched a bitter attack against
the gates of the rivals. The efforts of the writing fraternity were
justified with the desirable goal at the last minute of the match.
After the match all the participants received prizes and presents. To
note, head of the Yerevan OSCE Office, Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin
was among the honorary quests.

CITIZENS OF ARMENIA WASTE ABOUT $400 MLN PER YEAR FOR BRIBE
YEREVAN, JULY 15. ARMINFO. According to the data of European experts,
in developed industrial countries about 1-2% of the citizens solve
their problems by means of bribes, in Russia – 20%, in African
countries – 50-60%, in Armenia – about 40%.
Nongovernmental organizations and human rights defenders of Armenia
discussed Friday the spread of bribery in Armenia and possible
mechanisms on fight against corruption. Armen Ayvazian, Head of the
group on fight against corruption, a part of the Center for assistance
to the fight against terrorism, thinks that total amount of bribes
in Armenia is about $400 mln per year, and the total turnover from
corrupted revenues is several times higher. According to Ayvazian,
the fight against corruption should mean adoption of special laws,
elaboration of mechanisms of fight, presence of will of ruling circles,
society. “The international experience of fight against corruption
shows that rather the will of the leadership of the country than the
form of state government is the key factor”, Ayvazian said.
At the same time the reporters stressed the necessity of ensuring
transparency of the activities of the officials. “Only the transparency
may stop the mass abuses when conducting tenders”, representative of
the Humanitarian Research Center Lawyer Edward Mamikonian said.

Turkey-Russia Relations Dynamics
By Asim Oku, AIA Turkish section.
Axis Information and Analysis
12.05.2005
The 90s: from “image of enemy” to “feeble partner”
After collapse of the USSR, Moscow continued perceiving Turkey as NATO
sentinel and a traditional rival in the area of the vital Russian
interests: the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Central Asia and the Middle
East. Kremlin considered Ankara as a leading sponsor of Islamic and
separatist movements in the Caucasus. Russian leadership was afraid that
Turkey, appealing to “pan -Turkism” and wide common cultural grounds
with the peoples of the Central Asia, is trying to expand its influence
upon them.
Turkish government was irritated by Russian counteracts against lining
of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline. Both countries accused each other in
supporting separatists: the Chechen – in Russia, the Kurdish – in
Turkey. Revision by both states of previously developed stereotypes
begins at the end of the ’90s. Ankara and Moscow start to perceive each
other not as a threat, but rather as a weak and, consequently not very
dangerous competitors, colliding with the same external challenges and
problems.
“The Default” in Russia, its military failures in the war with the
Chechen resistance, its inability to defend interests of Serbia in the
Balkans, reduced the fear of “Russian Bear” in Ankara. Correspondingly,
political and economic crisis in Turkey at the beginning of 2001 was
perceived in Moscow as a sign of weakness and instability. It lowers the
level of concern about the possibility of Turkish expansion in the
Central Asia and the Caucasus. Both countries aspire to benefit from
mutual relations – both on political and economic level. Simultaneously,
the rising of the US influence in the Caucasus leads to a rapprochement
of the former adversaries.
Economic Factor
Visit of the Russian Prime Minister Victor Tchernomyrdin to Ankara in
December 1997 (first visit in the rank of prime minister after the
collapse of the USSR) opens a new page in Russian-Turkish relations. It
was followed by a reciprocal visit of Bulent Ecevit to Moscow in
November 1999, during which the parties came out with joint declaration
on fighting terrorism. Prime Minister Mikchail Kasyanov’s visit to
Turkey in October 2000 strengthened the ties that were previously
attained. The apogee of partnership was the arrival of Vladimir Putin to
Ankara in December 2004, and the visit of Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Moscow
on January 10, 2005. Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov and leading Russian
businessmen accompanied Putin during this visit. Erdogan was accompanied
by 600 Turkish businessmen in his visit to Moscow. Economic cooperation
became the foremost basis of rapprochement. The volume of trade reached
10 billion dollars in 2004, and is growing 15-20% annually. Russia
became Turkey’s second most important trade partner after Germany. The
“Blue stream” gas pipeline turned Russia into main supplier of natural
gas to Turkey. Projects of Russian and Kazakh oil delivery via Turkey to
the West were developed, reducing tension around Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan
Pipeline issue. Figures of the Russian tourism to Turkey grow rapidly.
Military cooperation is also on the rise. From the end of the ’90s
Turkey started to receive the Russian military equipment, including
helicopters and armored troop carriers.
Pain Points
Despite the intensive process of rapprochement there are still several
controversial issues. They include the Chechen and the Kurdish
separatism, the Nagorny Karabakh problem, the Cyprian question, the
Russian military bases in the Caucasus, the intervention of Turkey in
Georgia’s and Azerbaijan’s policies.
Turkey strives to attain replacement of the Russian peace-making
contingent in Aphasia, as well as in the other “hot spots” in the
Caucasus, with the international forces. Moscow in its turn is
discontented with the deliveries of Turkish military equipment to
Georgia, as well as with the participation of Turkey in modernization of
the Air Force base near Tbilisi. At the same time parties aspire to
soften existing disagreements. Turkish leaders constantly repeat, that
“the Chechen question is Russia’s interior problem”. Russia has limited
the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) activity in the country, but Ankara
insists on the announcement of this group as a “terrorist organization”.
Eurasian ideas
Russia and Turkey today share much deeper understanding of geopolitical
issues. After the intrusion of the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the
increase of the American military presence in the Eastern and Southern
Europe, both states demonstrate obvious anti-American shift in their
policy. Turkey aspires to enter the EU with its aversion to “US
Hegemony”, while Russia tries to strengthen ties with France and Germany
– the principal conductors of the anti-American policy in Europe. Russia
is extremely concerned about the loss of influence in Ukraine and
Georgia, and Turkey is worried by the attempts to restrain its presence
in the Balkans. Both countries emphasize their “Eurasian nature” (this
phrase belongs to the ambassador of Russia in Turkey Alexander Lebedev),
are dissatisfied with their minor role in the world, and look for the
new allies in Asia, approaching Iran, China and India. Relations between
Ankara and Damascus improved to a great extent after the Turkish Justice
and Development Party came to power
Kremlin also revives its “special relations” with the Syrian regime in
economic and military sphere. Both Turkey and Russia refused to support
the US military operation in Iraq in 2003. Growing concurrence of
interests between Turkey and Russia leads to the signing, in 2001 in New
York, of the “Eurasian cooperation agreement”.
Ankara in a pointed manner stays out of the US and NATO attempts to
“entrench” on the Russian borders. In return Russia supports Turkish
position on Cyprus. Frank anti-American moods dominate in the
intellectual and political elite of both countries (“Edinaya Rossiya” –
United Russia and Turkish Justice and Development Party). Both countries
gradually chill off the cooperation with Israel – the main US ally in
the Middle East, while simultaneously building partnership with Israel’s
sworn enemy – Syria. Both Ankara and Moscow indefatigably repeat that
they “aspire only to defend their national interests”. In the ”real
politic” it is expressed by the attempts to regain influence, which
both countries possessed throughout the blossoming era of the empires:
the Russian – the Soviet and the Ottoman.
With regard of the aforesaid, there is a tendency between the parties to
coordinate the opposition to Washington and to create the Eurasian
alignment to ”counterbalance” the American “Atlantism”.
Milestones in Russian – Turkish Mutual Relations During the Post-Soviet
Period
1992 – Suleyman Demirel, the Prime Minister of Turkey visited Moscow.
Signing of the “Principles of bilateral relations between the Turkish
Republic and the Russian Federation”. In June the president of Russia
Boris Yeltsin came to Istanbul to the summit of leaders of “Organization
on economic cooperation on the Black Sea” states.
1993 – Tansu Ciller, the Prime Minister of Turkey visited Moscow. The
agreement on creation of a Joint committee and Working group in the
sphere of telecommunications, energy, industry and hi-tech was signed.
1995 – Tansu Ciller participated in May 9th celebrations of the 50th
anniversary of victory over the fascist Germany. Ciller and the head of
the Russian government Victor Tchernomyrdin discussed the future of
mutual relations.
1996 – Suleyman Demirel, ex-Prime Minister of Turkey participated in
Moscow summit of leaders of “Organization on economic cooperation on the
Black Sea” states. Parliaments of two countries signed the Protocol on
cooperation and the Memorandum of cooperation in fighting terrorism.
Construction of Turkish Trade center started in Moscow.
1997 – Victor Tchernomyrdin came with an official visit to Ankara in
December. It was the first visit of the Russian Prime Minister to Turkey
after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The parties agreed on a
long-term program on cooperation in economic, commercial and scientific
sphere.
1999 – The Prime Ministers Bulent Ecevit and Vladimir Putin signed in
Moscow the Joint declaration on fighting terrorism and the Report on
creation of the Incorporated economic committee, which lays a foundation
for further economic cooperation.
2000 – the Prime Minister of Russia Michael Kasyanov visited Turkey. The
parties signed the agreement on creation of Joint committee on
cooperation in the field of military industry.
2001 – Igor Ivanov`s, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, visit to
Turkey laid down a basis for the bilateral cultural cooperation.
Representatives of both countries signed in New York the “Eurasian
cooperation agreement”.
2002 – General Anatoly Kvashnin, commander of the Joint Staff of the
Russian Federation, visited Ankara in January. The parties signed the
frame cooperation agreement in military sphere and the Cooperation
agreement in preparation of the military personnel. General Hussein
Kivrikoglu, Turkish Chief of Staff visited Russia in June. The Joint
bilateral Committee on military and technical cooperation met in Ankara
in September. The “Blue stream” gas pipeline was activated.
2004 – Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdalla Gul came to Moscow to
discuss with his Russian counterpart the issue of the Chechen and the
Kurdish separatism, and the situation in Nagorny Karabakh and in Cyprus.
Official visit to Turkey of the Russian President Vladimir Putin took
place in December. The parties signed several documents, including the
Joint declaration of friendship and multi-plane cooperation strengthening.
2005 – Official visit to Moscow of the Prime Minister of Turkey Recep
Tayyip Erdogan took place in January. The visit was dated for the
opening of Turkish Trade center in Moscow.

FORUM 18 NEWS SERVICE, Oslo, Norway
The right to believe, to worship and witness
The right to change one’s belief or religion
The right to join together and express one’s belief
=================================================
15 July 2005
KAZAKHSTAN: UNREGISTERED RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY NOW BANNED, MISSIONARY
ACTIVITY RESTRICTED
New national security amendments signed by President Nursultan Nazarbayev
on 8 July have brought in tight new restrictions on religious activity
that violate Kazakhstan’s international human rights commitments. All
unregistered religious activity is now illegal and those leading or taking
part in unregistered religious meetings can be fined. Missionary activity
by local people and foreigners is illegal unless missionaries are from a
registered religious organisation and have individual registration from
the authorities of the local area where they operate. Literature for use
by missionaries requires prior censorship from local authorities. The OSCE
had urged that the ban on unregistered religious activity should be
excluded from the law. “Unfortunately this was not done,” an official of
the OSCE mission in Almaty told Forum 18 News Service. The OSCE is
preparing a detailed critique of the “overly restrictive” new law.
* See full article below. *
13 July 2005
NAGORNO-KARABAKH: SUSPENDED SENTENCE FOR EMBATTLED BAPTIST CONSCRIPT
Embattled Baptist conscript Gagik Mirzoyan received a two-year sentence,
suspended for one year, at his 7 July trial. He had refused to swear the
military oath or serve with weapons since being called up into the army of
the unrecognised republic of Nagorno-Karabakh in the South Caucasus. “This
means he won’t have to serve any time in prison – if of course he does
nothing wrong over the next year,” Albert Voskanyan of the local Centre
for Civilian Initiatives told Forum 18 News Service. Beaten twice since
his conscription last December, Mirzoyan spent 10 days in prison for
preaching his faith in his army unit. “After a lot of pressure, Gagik was
finally happy because he could see his brothers and sisters from the
church at his trial,” a Baptist told Forum 18.
11 July 2005
TURKMENISTAN: PRESIDENT ATTEMPTS TO MEDDLE IN ORTHODOX STRUCTURES
Russian Orthodox Patriarch Aleksi II has politely sidelined Turkmen
President Saparmurat Niyazov’s attempt to split the dozen or so Russian
Orthodox parishes in Turkmenistan away from the Central Asian diocese, and
subordinate them directly to the Patriarch. A Moscow-based priest familiar
with the situation, who preferred not to be identified, insisted to Forum
18 News Service that the Church itself has to make such decisions, not the
state. The priest told Forum 18 that he believes President Niyazov “wants
the Orthodox Church to exist, but a Church that is in his hand, just as he
has done with Islam.” Stressing that the Moscow Patriarchate is keen to see
an end to the tensions between the Church and the Turkmen government, the
priest deplored the denial of visas to three or four priests who the
diocese wished to send to serve in Turkmenistan, and the refusal of the
Turkmen government so far to re-register Russian Orthodox parishes.
11 July 2005
UZBEKISTAN: COURT CONFIRMS ALL PROTESTANTS BANNED IN NORTH-WEST
The last legal Protestant church in north-western Uzbekistan has had its
appeal against a regional Justice Ministry ban turned down in court, Forum
18 News Service has learnt. All Protestant activities in north-west
Uzbekistan are now banned after a Nukus court rejected the Emmanuel Full
Gospel Church’s appeal. Separately, another example of official condoning
of kangaroo courts staged by local residents against Muslim-born converts
to other faiths has come to light. An Uzbek Protestant, who preferred to
be anonymous, told Forum 18 of the case of Daniyara Ibaidulayev, a
Protestant convert who was on 29 June beaten up by his brother and another
villager, who cut his lips with a knife, telling him he must return to
Islam. The district public prosecutor’s office told Ibaidulayev that “his
problems would cease as soon as he returned to Islam”. Also, a Hare
Krishna devotee has been threatened with losing her job as a
schoolteacher, if she does not stop sharing her beliefs.
12 July 2005
UZBEKISTAN: POLICE CONTINUE HUNT FOR RELIGIOUS LITERATURE
Police and secret police continue to hunt down religious literature in
Uzbekistan, Forum 18 News Service has learnt. Latest seizures include 15
Bibles from the home of Protestant pastor Viktor Klimov in Gulistan on 17
June, 90 Hare Krishna books seized by police and secret police from a
devotee in Bostan on 16 June. Five Protestants in Kungrad were officially
warned on 1 June, after bringing religious literature into the country. An
official of the government~Rs Religious Affairs Committee has defended such
seizures, telling Forum 18 that “the police did have the right to seize
Klimov~Rs Bibles temporarily, but they then had to send the books to us for
analysis, and we of course will conclude that these books (in other words,
the Bibles) are not banned in Uzbekistan,” Begzot Kadyrov stated. Such
censorship of and restrictions on religious literature violate
Uzbekistan~Rs international commitments to freedom of expression and
freedom of religion.
14 July 2005
UZBEKISTAN: NO PROGRESS FOR ARRESTED PENTECOSTAL
Pentecostal Kural Bekjanov is still being held at a police station in the
capital Tashkent with no progress on the investigation into whether he was
connected to the murder of a US citizen in the city. “We are convinced of
his innocence, and our suspicion is that his religious beliefs are the
reason for his ordeal,” Iskander Najafov, a lawyer for the Full Gospel
Church, told Forum 18 News Service. But Shukhrat Ismailov of the
government’s religious affairs committee denied this, telling Forum 18
church members’ claims were “pure speculation”. Since his arrest on 14
June, Bekjanov has been tortured by police and cell mates trying to force
him to abandon his Christian faith. Meanwhile two Jehovah’s Witnesses in
Karshi who have already been fined for “illegal” religious activity now
face criminal charges with penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment.
14 July 2005
VIETNAM: THREE FUNDAMENTAL CAUSES OF PERSECUTION REMAIN
Despite three new legal documents on religion since last November,
government harassment of religious communities has not eased. Prison
sentences on Mennonite pastor Nguyen Hong Quang and a colleague were
confirmed in April, two Hoa Hao Buddhists were given prison sentences and
massive fines the same month for distributing the teachings of their
movement’s founder, while Hmong Protestants in the north-west were beaten
by local officials and had their properties confiscated in May. The
Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam and numerous Protestant churches remain
outlawed. A comparison of the situation five years ago and today shows no
change in the fundamental causes of persecution: the restrictions on
unregistered religious activity, the interference in the activity of
registered religious communities and the lack of a transparent line of
command from the central government to local officials which allows local
violations to continue. If religious freedom is to improve, these three
causes of persecution will be crucial benchmarks of change.
15 July 2005
KAZAKHSTAN: UNREGISTERED RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY NOW BANNED, MISSIONARY
ACTIVITY RESTRICTED
By Igor Rotar, Central Asia Correspondent, Forum 18 News Service
In defiance of its international human rights commitments, Kazakhstan has
banned all unregistered religious activity and introduced fines for
leaders and participants in such activity, Forum 18 News Service reports.
It has also restricted missionary activity to licensed missionaries only
whose literature requires prior censorship, with fines – and, for foreign
nationals, deportation – for those who violate the restrictions. The
controversial changes to the religion law – which echo those taken in
neighbouring Uzbekistan in 1998 – came in the sweeping new law introducing
changes and amendments to legislation relating to the provision of national
security, approved by parliament on 29 June and signed on 8 July by
Kazakhstan’s president Nursultan Nazarbayev. The law came into force on
its publication in Kazakh-language newspapers on 13 July and in
Russian-language newspapers on 14 July.
Under scrutiny in both houses of parliament since February, the law has
prompted strong criticism from international and local human rights
organisations, including the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE). Given the widespread criticism, it is possible the Kazakh
authorities timed the announcement that they would not be deporting
high-profile asylum-seeker and eye-witness of the Andijan massacre
Lutfullo Shamsudinov back to his native Uzbekistan as a way to distract
attention from the announcement that the president had signed the law.
An official of the OSCE office in Almaty, who preferred not to be named,
told Forum 18 on 14 July that the organisation’s Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights in Warsaw was preparing a detailed critique
of the “overly restrictive nature” of the new law which would shortly be
published.
The adoption of these sweeping restrictions on religious communities,
political parties, the media and non-governmental organisations – which
came as the OSCE was holding a conference in Vienna on how to protect
human rights in the fight against terrorism – will kill off any lingering
hopes Kazakhstan might have had to become OSCE Chairman-in-Office in 2009.
The new law amends a range of other laws and codes, including the Civil
Procedure Code, the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedures code, the Code
of Administrative Offences and the laws on freedom of religion and of
religious associations, operational investigative activity, the media,
non-commercial organisations and political parties.
Although Muslims and the Russian Orthodox have broadly supported the law,
other smaller religious communities have been highly concerned (see
F18News 13 May 2005 ).
Particularly worried have been the Council of Churches Baptists, who
reject registration in principle in all the former Soviet republics where
they operate. One church member told Forum 18 on 13 July that
congregations in Kazakhstan have written numerous appeals to President
Nazarbayev and other officials in recent months calling on them not to
adopt the new law. They point out that even when registration was not
compulsory, their pastors have been fined for leading unregistered
communities.
Article 4 of the amended religion law has a new fourth section that
forbids the activity of unregistered religious organisations. A new
article, 4-1, requires all citizens and foreigners engaged in missionary
activity to register before they conduct such activity. The article
specifically bans all missionary activity by any individual who does not
have such registration.
A new article, 4-2, sets out the way missionaries register with the local
authorities annually: the potential missionary has to present the local
authorities with proof that they represent a registered religious
organisation which has specifically engaged them to do missionary activity
in the local area and all literature, video and other materials that the
missionary intends to use for local officials to censor. Any new materials
to be used after the missionary already has registration also have to be
submitted to the local authorities for censorship.
A new article, 10-1, bans all activity by religious organisations whose
activities have been suspended or banned by a court.
The new law also made corresponding changes to the code of administrative
offences, adding a new article, 374-1, to punish “leadership of and
participation in the activity of public and religious associations that
have not been registered in accordance with the law of the Republic of
Kazakhstan, as well as financing their activity”. Under this article:
– The leadership of the activity of public and religious associations that
have not been registered in the proper manner, and also those organisations
whose activity has been halted or banned will attract a fine amounting to
100 times the minimum monthly wage, currently 971 Tenge [47 Norwegian
Kroner, 6 Euros, or 7 US Dollars].
– Participation in the activity of public and religious associations that
have not been registered in the proper manner and also those organisations
whose activity has been halted or banned will attract a fine amounting to
50 times the minimum monthly wage.
– The financing of the activity of public and religious associations that
have not been registered in the proper manner and also those organisations
whose activity has been halted or banned will attract a fine amounting to
200 times the minimum monthly wage.
Additions have also been adopted to Article 375 of the administrative
code, an article that already punishes violations of the religion law
(including refusal to register a religious organisation). According to the
new addition, “Missionary work carried out by citizens, foreign citizens
and persons who have no citizenship, without the appropriate registration,
will attract a fine of up to 15 times the monthly wage of a citizen, while
foreigners and persons without citizenship will be fined up to 15 times
the monthly wage and will be expelled beyond the borders of the Republic
of Kazakhstan.”
Article 375 also now punishes leaders of religious organisations that
break any law with fines of up to thirty times the minimum monthly wage,
while the organisations themselves can be fined up to 200 times the
minimum monthly wage and banned for up to six months. Religious
organisations that “systematically carry out activity in defiance of their
statute” or refuse to stop activities that led to their being suspended
face fines of up to 300 times the minimum monthly wage and a total ban on
their activities, while leaders of such organisations can be fined up to
40 times the minimum monthly wage.
The OSCE official told Forum 18 that the organisation had recommended that
the religion law amendment banning unregistered religious activity should
be excluded. “Unfortunately this was not done,” the official declared. “We
reckon that the parliamentary deputies only took on board one of our
recommendations, excluding the amendment that would have granted the
prosecutor’s office the right to halt the activity of media outlets,
political parties and religious organisations before a court decision had
been reached.”
One activist who has been involved in lobbying parliament during the
adoption process takes some comfort from the exclusion of a few of the
harshest measures in earlier drafts. Aleksandr Klyushev, head of the
Association of Religious Organisations of Kazakhstan, pointed out that the
definition of missionary activity has been changed. In the initial draft
law, missionary activity was defined as “promoting a faith by means of
religious proselytising activity”.
“Effectively, every individual believer fell into this definition,” he
told Forum 18 on 14 July. “But we have managed to ensure that missionary
activity is defined in the law as teaching and promoting a religion by
means of religious proselytising preaching which is not included in the
statute of a religious organisation that is active in Kazakhstan.”
Klyushev hopes that it will not now be possible to see representatives of
any faith as missionaries, even if they have just one registered group in
Kazakhstan.
Klyushev also voiced some satisfaction that although the initial amendment
to Article 5 of the religion law stated that “the religious education of a
child must not harm his all-round development or physical and moral
health”, pressure from religious believers has ensured that the term
“all-round development” has been omitted. “The phrase ‘all-round
development’ could be applied very widely, even, for example, to an
atheist education, and so we are very pleased we have managed to exclude
it.”
At the same time, Klyushev declared himself extremely dissatisfied at the
introduction of Article 374-1 of the Administrative code and the
amendments to Article 375 of the Administrative code. “Even before
Nursultan Nazarbayev signed this law, local officials started treating it
as already effective and started persecuting Protestants on the basis of
the changes to the Administrative Code,” he told Forum 18 (see F18News 30
May 2005 ).
The authorities have long sought to restrict religious rights by
tightening the 1992 religion law. A harsh new law was adopted by
parliament in 2002 (the eighth such attempt) and approved by President
Nazarbayev. However, under pressure from international and local human
rights organisations, the constitutional council ruled in April 2002 that
the new law contradicted the constitution and it was withdrawn.
For a personal commentary on the legal moves to seriously restrict
religious freedom in Kazakhstan under the guise of “national security”,
see F18News
For more background, see Forum 18’s Kazakhstan religious freedom survey at
A printer-friendly map of Kazakhstan is available at
las/index.html?Parent=asia&Rootmap=kazakh
(END )
© Forum 18 News Service. All rights reserved. ISSN 1504-2855
You may reproduce or quote this article provided that credit is given to
F18News
Past and current Forum 18 information can be found at
–Boundary_(ID_mCjWTnLiJ/kbCUEcMFamAw)–

Congressional Record: July 13, 2005 (Senate)

LEADERSHIP AND COORDINATION IN LANGUAGE EDUCATION
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the foreign
language needs of the country, a problem that is receiving renewed
public attention because of the ongoing war in Iraq and the impact the
lack of language expertise is having on our foreign policy. As John
Limbert, president of the American Foreign Service Association, was
quoted in the Federal Times last month, the shortage of linguists
“makes our mission of representing the American people that much
harder.”
Frankly, I agree with Mr. Limbert. The stability and economic
vitality of the United States and our national security depend on
American citizens who are knowledgeable about the world. We need civil
servants, area experts, diplomats, business people, educators, and
other public officials with the ability to communicate at an advanced
level in the languages and understand the cultures of the people with
whom they interact. An ongoing commitment to maintaining these
relationships and language expertise helps prevent a crisis from
occurring and provides diplomatic and language resources when needed.
My own State of Hawaii is a leader in promoting language education
and cultural sensitivity. As a gateway to Asian and Pacific nations, we
in Hawaii understand the importance of knowing other languages and
cultures, which help to develop strong relationships with other people.
For example, according to the 2000 Census, more than 300,000 people in
Hawaii, or about 27 percent of those 5 years and older, spoke a
language other than English at home. This is compared to about 18
percent nationwide. In addition, the University of Hawaii is a leader
in teaching Korean and is the host of one of two National Korean
Flagship Programs established by the National Security Education
Program. Hawaii is also host to the internationally recognized East-
West Center, an education and research organization established in
Hawaii by Congress in 1960, which is a leader in promoting and
strengthening relations between the United States and the countries of
the Asia Pacific region.
In 2000 the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on International
Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services, then chaired by Senator
Cochran, held a hearing on the foreign language needs of the Federal
Government. At that hearing Ellen Laipson,
[[Page S8208]]
vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, testified as to the
language shortfalls in the intelligence community and how these
shortfalls could impact agency missions, especially in emergency
situations. For example, a lack of language skills limits analysts’
insight into a foreign culture which restricts their ability to
anticipate political instability and warn policymakers about a
potential trouble spot. In addition, Ms. Laipson testified that
thousands of technical papers providing details on foreign research and
development in scientific or technical areas were not being translated
because of the lack of personnel to interpret the material, which could
lead to the possibility of “a technological surprise.”
Understanding the importance of improving our language capabilities,
I introduced with Senators Durbin and Thompson the Homeland Security
Education Act and the Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act. Our
bills proposed a comprehensive strategy to improve language education,
as well as science and math education, at the elementary, high school,
and college levels and to provide incentives for individuals possessing
such skills as a result of these programs to enter Federal service in
critical national security positions. The Senate passed the Homeland
Security Federal Workforce Act on November 5, 2003, and provisions of
the bill were included in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. In
addition, I successfully added an amendment to the Defense
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2005 requiring the Department of
Defense to report on how it will address its language shortfalls in
both the short and long term. Earlier this year, the Department issued
its Defense Language Transformation Roadmap which lays out an ambitious
plan for improving the language education of its employees.
While Congress has adopted several provisions to improve language
education, including some that I have proposed, it has not been easy to
gain a wider acceptance of this need. It has been said that the events
of September 11, 2001, were a modern day Sputnik moment, demonstrating
that shortages of critical skills can have dire national security
consequences. While Sputnik pointed out the importance of science and
math education, September 11th reminded us that language skills and
cultural awareness are essential for improving relations with the
international community and strengthening our national security.
However, nearly 4 years after that terrible day, we are still without
sufficient language skills. We still have not learned the lesson that
the Soviet launch of Sputnik taught us in 1958: investment in education
is just as important to our national security as investing in weapons
systems. As such, we need sustained leadership and a coordinated plan
of action to address this on-going problem and to ensure that this
Nation never falls short in its language capabilities again or fails to
communicate effectively with our neighbors around the world.
That is why I have introduced the National Foreign Language
Coordination Act with Senators Dodd and Cochran. Our legislation, S.
1089, is designed to provide the needed leadership and coordination of
language education. Primarily, the legislation creates a National
Foreign Language Coordination Council which is composed of the
secretaries of various executive branch agencies and chaired by a
national language director. The national language director would be
appointed by the President and is to be a nationally recognized
individual with credentials and abilities necessary to create and
implement long-term solutions to achieving national foreign language
and cultural competency. By having the key players of the executive
branch on the Council, I hope that each agency will come away with an
understanding of what their role is, how they can reach out to their
stakeholders for input, and become engaged in addressing this problem.
The Council would be charged with developing and overseeing the
implementation of a national language strategy. In particular, the
Council would identify priorities, increase public awareness, advocate
needed resources, and coordinate efforts within the Federal Government
to ensure that we are meeting our goal of improved language education
and cultural understanding. As former Senator and 9/11 Commissioner Bob
Kerrey recently said, “Someone in the executive branch has got to say,
`Here’s where we are today, here’s where we want to be in five years,
and here’s what it’s going to take to get there.’ ” The National
Foreign Language Coordination Act will do just that.
There have been several articles issued recently that have
highlighted the need for more language training and the need for
leadership in this area. I ask that the following articles be printed
in the Record:
Tichakorn Hill, Does Anyone Here Speak Arabic? ( or Farsi, or
Pashto?) The Government’s Push to Close the Language Gap, Federal
Times, June 20, 2005. John Diamond, Terror War Still Short on
Linguists, USA Today, June 20, 2005. John Diamond, Muslim World Isn’t
Big with U.S. Students, USA Today, June 19, 2005.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From USA Today, Jun. 20, 2005]
Muslim World Isn’t Big With U.S. Students
(By John Diamond)
Washington–Despite an expansion of federal efforts to
promote learning Arabic and other languages of the Islamic
world, there has been no dramatic increase in Americans
studying in countries where such languages are spoken,
according to the latest statistics on overseas study. That’s
the case even though the number of Americans studying abroad
has more than doubled since the mid-1990s.
There are some signs of growing interest among American
students in learning Arabic, which the U.S. intelligence
community hopes will help bolster its ranks with specialists
for the war on terrorism.
But as Karin Ryding, a professor of Arabic at Georgetown
University, points out, U.S. intelligence can’t get by with
“hothouse” Arabic speakers who have learned the language
sitting in American classrooms. They must travel to the
region and immerse themselves to become fluent.
Overall interest in foreign languages hasn’t surged either
since the Sept. 11 attacks. The difficulty of learning Arabic
and other Middle East languages means it will be years before
academia can produce significantly more graduates fluent in
languages important to U.S. national security.
“It’s going to take a good, long while. It’s going to be a
lot more expensive. And it’s a question of whether you can
afford to wait,” says Andrew Krepinevich, head of the Center
for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington-based
defense think tank.
Numbers aren’t good
For 2002-03, the first full academic year after 9/11, 1,293
Americans studied in predominantly Muslim countries in
Africa, the Middle East and Asia. That’s a 4.5% increase over
the yearly average of 1,237 for the five years leading up to
Sept. 11, according to an analysis of figures compiled by the
Institute of International Education, which administers
several federal study-abroad scholarship programs. The
figures cover students who financed their own education as
well as those who received private and public scholarships.
The list of majority-Muslim countries in which students
studied is not identical from year to year but typically
includes countries in the Middle East and North Africa such
as Senegal, Morocco, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait,
Lebanon and Turkey; and nations in Asia such as Pakistan,
Indonesia and Malaysia.
The institute’s figures show that more Americans are
studying abroad: 174,629 in 2002-03, up from 84,403 in 1994-
95. Yet fewer are focusing on foreign languages: Two decades
ago, 16.7% of Americans studying abroad listed foreign
languages as their primary field of study, according to the
institute’s figures. A decade ago, it was down to 11.3%; for
2002-03, 7.9%.
“Despite our growing needs, the number of undergraduate
foreign language degrees conferred is only 1% of all
degrees,” Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said last month. Dodd is
sponsoring legislation that would increase federal spending
on language and foreign study and create a “national
language director” to coordinate language programs.
The stakes are high, according to a January Pentagon
report: “Conflict against enemies speaking less-commonly
taught languages and thus the need for foreign language
capability will not abate.”
Language ability is critical not just for fighting wars or
spying, says Thomas Farrell, deputy assistant secretary of
State for academic programs. It also means having a better
knowledge of “regions of the world that are important to the
United States,” Farrell says. “We’re seeking to
demonstrate, especially to countries with Islamic
populations, that people in the United States have respect
for their societies and want to learn about them.”
Uptick in Arabic studies
For years, U.S. students didn’t learn much about Arabic. In
2002, the latest nationwide figures available, 10,584
students were studying Arabic, whether as a major or an
elective. That was a 92% increase from 1998 but
[[Page S8209]]
still amounted to fewer than 1% of all students enrolled in
foreign language courses in 2002, according to a report by
the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages.
The Department of Education is spending about $10 million
this year for language study centers based in the Middle
East, U.S. language development centers and scholarships for
study abroad. The Pentagon is spending $3.6 million for
Middle East language scholarships and other language
programs. Some of the money is tied to promises that students
will commit to jobs in national security.
The State Department handles the bulk of federal money for
language scholarships through its Fulbright programs for
undergraduates and scholars. Last year, the department spent
$86 million on Fulbright and other programs out of a total
education and cultural exchange budget of $231 million. Not
all of that $86 million was focused on Muslim countries,
however.
Concerned that no one coordinates the federal programs, a
group of senators–including Dodd, Thad Cochran, R-Miss., and
Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii–wants to start a National Foreign
Language Coordination Council.
For now, U.S. military and intelligence agencies compete
with one another for a small pool of qualified candidates.
Arabic professor John Walbridge of the University of Indiana
is worried about the push to fill hiring quotas.
“They’re desperate for people,” Walbridge says. “They’re
recruiting people who by no reasonable standard are ready to
do intelligence work using Arabic.”
____
[From USA Today, June 20, 2005]
Terror War Still Short on Linguists
(By John Diamond)
Washington.–Nearly four years after the Sept. 11 attacks,
the federal government has created a profusion of programs to
train students in languages and cultures important in the war
on terrorism. But government leaders and language experts say
the effort is an uncoordinated jumble too slow to produce
measurable results.
“We’re not there, and we’re not moving fast enough,” says
Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee.
Since 9/11, Congress and the White House have pumped money
into new and existing programs for training in Arabic and
other Middle Eastern languages and cultures. Annual spending
has jumped from about $41 million in 2001 to $100 million
today. While the funding and programs have grown, the results
are, so far, insufficient, according to Sen. Chris Dodd, D-
Conn. The government needs to hire 34,000 foreign-language
specialists, particularly Arabic speakers, for homeland
security, defense and intelligence agencies, he says.
The effort to produce more speakers of Arabic and other
languages of the Islamic world is needed because many
Americans fluent in these languages have difficulty getting
security clearances if they have relatives in the region.
Producing a “homegrown” speaker of Arabic, with its
different alphabet and many dialects, can take 10 years, says
professor John Walbridge of the University of Indiana, “if
you apply yourself.”
No government agency coordinates this effort, and there are
no readily available statistics on how many students get
federal money intended to produce more speakers of Arabic,
Urdu and other strategic languages and more experts on the
Islamic world.
Based on public records and interviews with relevant
officials, about $9.5 million in federal money goes to
programs designed specifically to produce job candidates for
U.S. intelligence and other national security agencies. Only
about 40% of that total, roughly $3.8 million, is focused on
the Middle East.
The number of students in these programs–named for current
and former chairmen of the Senate Intelligence Committee–is
modest: 150 in the Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program
and 230 in the David Boren Scholarship program. About one-
third of the students focus on Middle Eastern languages.
“Someone in the executive branch has got to say, Here’s
where we are today, here’s where we want to be in five years,
and here’s what it’s going to take to get there,” ‘ says Bob
Kerrey, a Democrat who served on the federal commission that
investigated 9/11. That panel pointed out last year that only
six students received undergraduate degrees in Arabic in
2002.
Walbridge and other Arabic scholars agree that living in
the Middle East is essential to becoming fluent. But the
number of Americans studying in predominantly Muslim
countries has remained about the same as pre-Sept. 11 levels.
In 2002-03, the most recent year for which figures are
available, fewer than 1,300 Americans were studying in Muslim
countries, or less than 1% of the Americans studying abroad.
“As a nation, we just don’t have any sort of organized
language policy, and it shows,” says Kirk Belnap, director
of a federally funded National Middle Eat Language Resource
Center at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah.
____
[From the Federal Times, June 20, 2005]
Does Anyone Here Speak Arabic? Or Farsi, or Pashto . . . The
Government’s Push To Close the Language Gap
(By Tichakorn Hill)
When a congressman asked David Kay, the former head of the
U.S. team searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,
how many on his 1,400-person team spoke Arabic and understood
the technology of weapons of mass destruction, the answer was
discouraging.
“I could count on the fingers of one hand,” Rep. Rush
Holt, D-N.J., recalled Kay as saying about a year ago.
Similarly, Holt asked special forces who were combing
through Afghan mountain ranges for Osama bin Laden how many
of them spoke the local language of Pashto. They said they
picked up a little while they were there.
“If Osama bin Laden is truly American public enemy No. 1,
how do we expect to track him down if we cannot speak the
languages of the people who are hiding him?” Holt said.
Whether it is military troops, intelligence analysts,
translators, interpreters, or just federal employees
delivering services to an increasingly diverse American
population, there is a troubling shortage of people with
foreign language skills. And the shortage is most critical in
Middle Eastern and South Asian languages: Arabic; Pashto;
Dari, which is spoken in Afghanistan; Farsi, spoken in Iran;
Kurdish, spoken in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Armenia and Syria; and
Urdu, spoken in India and Pakistan.
The consequences, say experts, are disturbing. The problem
threatens government efforts to keep the peace and rebuild
infrastructure in Iraq, translate foreign documents and
interpret foreign conversations that could prove to be
valuable intelligence, explain U.S. policies to foreign
populations, investigate terrorists, and track down illegal
aliens.
The shortage of linguists “makes our mission of
representing the American people that much harder,” said
John Limbert, president of the American Foreign Service
Association and a former ambassador to Mauritania. “Most of
that mission involves communication–speaking and listening
to what others are telling us. I don’t see how we can do that
without knowing the language of those with whom we are
communicating.”
The Defense and State departments, intelligence agencies,
the FBI and many other agencies were suffering severe
shortages of linguists even before 9/11. The FBI, for
example, complained to Congress in 2000 that it had large
stockpiles of audio tapes and documents awaiting translation.
The Defense Department didn’t have a single Dari-speaking
employee. And it had only one Marine and one sailor who spoke
Pashto.
Kevin Hendzel, a spokesman for the American Translators
Association, estimates it will take intelligence agencies
between 10 and 15 years to catch up in translating tons of
materials recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan. “As a
society, we pay a huge price for not being competent in
foreign languages. This is particularly true in the national
security area where the people who want to do us harm do not
speak English,” he said.
Federal agencies are expected to hire more than 10,000
contract and staff linguists this year.
But while hiring of linguists since 9/11 has exploded, it
still hasn’t kept pace with the government’s needs–
especially for people who know Arabic and South Asian
languages.
The problem
Federal managers blame the American education system.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics,
out of 2 million college graduates in 2004, only 17 earned
bachelor’s or advanced degrees in Arabic. Only 206 earned
degrees in Chinese, the world’s most popular language.
“Academia is not producing enough of the right kind of
linguists fast enough,” said an FBI official. “And we
simply cannot wait for the education system to catch up.”
But the government is trying to kick-start the system. Last
year the Defense Department began awarding grants to
universities for foreign language studies in Chinese, Arabic,
Korean and Russian.
And in Congress, Holt introduced this year the National
Security Language Act, which would subsidize colleges and
universities that teach critical languages and offer
intensive study programs overseas. The bill, which has 43
cosponsors, also would repay student loans for those who
study critical foreign languages and then work for federal
agencies or as elementary or secondary school language
teachers.
The recruiting challenge
In their rush to recruit people with hard-to-find language
skills, agency managers are trying a variety of tactics.
They hold job fairs in minority communities, such as Arabic
communities in California and Michigan. They advertise in
foreign-language newspapers, offer thousands of dollars in
sign-up bonuses, and recruit at colleges and universities
where needed languages are taught.
But there are a lot of factors working against them. One is
stiff competition for a limited pool of candidates.
“We’re always in competition with other federal agencies
and the private sector for that talent,” said Reginald
Wells, deputy commissioner for human resources at the Social
Security Administration.
Many candidates are foreign-born and foreign-educated,
which presents another challenge for agencies trying to
verify their credentials.
And as if finding people who speak difficult languages is
not difficult enough, finding
[[Page S8210]]
people who know those languages at a professional or
technical level is even harder.
“Many of our assignments are highly technical and they
[native speakers] simply do not have vocabulary to move
between the two languages. That’s where our challenges lie,”
said Brenda Spraque, the director of Office of Language
Services at the State Department.
Not all candidates who meet the grade want to work for,
say, the Foreign Service and be posted far from their
families, said Nancy Serpa, former director of the Human
Resources for Recruitment, Examination and Employment at the
State Department.
“The Foreign Service is not a career for everyone, and
finding people who want to spend their career overseas away
from their family is very difficult to begin with, even
though we have a lot of people who take the Foreign Service
test,” Serpa said.
National Security Agency managers find that many candidates
are reluctant to move even to the agency’s Maryland
headquarters.
“We may be successful in attracting people to the type of
work we do and the opportunities and possibilities we have
available, but we’re not always successful in encouraging
them to move to Columbia or Baltimore,” said John Taflan,
NSA human resources director.
Getting new employees a security clearance is another
hurdle.
“We require, for all our full-time positions and even some
of our contract positions, that people have the ability to
obtain a security clearance, and that’s become extremely
difficult for those who are naturalized American citizens,”
Spraque said. “That limits your pool to a large extent.”
Hiring binge.
Despite the recruiting challenges, agencies have been
hiring.
Since 9/11, the FBI has hired nearly 1,000 linguists and
plans to hire 274 more next fiscal year. Currently it has
nearly 1,400 contract and full-time linguists who speak 100
languages. Ninety-five of those linguists are native speakers
of their languages. The bureau increased its linguists by 69
percent and the number of those in critical languages, such
as Arabic, increasing by 200 percent.
The State Department this year is hiring nearly 400 Foreign
Service generalists, many of whom will get training to speak
another language. It’s also hiring translators and
interpreters. Many of those new hires will staff new
embassies in Baghdad, Iraq, and Kabul, Afghanistan; and a new
liaison office in Tripoli, Libya. Currently the department
has about 7,000 employees speaking 60 languages working in
the United States and at 265 posts abroad.
Likewise, the National Security Agency is aggressively
recruiting: Currently at 35,000 employees, the agency plans
to hire 1,500 people every year until 2010, and many will
become language analysts. It offers sign-up bonuses of up to
20 percent of a person’s salary for those who speak critical
languages. NSA also hires 50 to 200 bilinguals a year whom it
then trains to speak a third language.
More training.
The shortage of linguists prompted the Defense Department
to overhaul its language program. The department in April
unveiled a plan, called the Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap, to build up its foreign language skills. It includes
directing money to colleges and universities to teach
languages. Also, the department plans to invest $45 million
more than current levels–$195 million in fiscal 2006–in its
Defense Language Institute. The department also will build a
database of active-duty personnel, civilians, reservists and
retirees who speak foreign languages.
“9/11 really changed our whole orientation to understand
that this is a major issue that’s going to be with us for a
long time,” said Gail McGinn, Defense deputy undersecretary
for plans. “It’s going to take a long time to solve it.”
Today, Defense has nearly 84,000 military linguists who
speak about 250 languages and dialects–up from 72,000 in
2000. The military services plan to train about 2,300
linguists this year. The Air Force is the most active and
plans to train 1,500 military linguists this year.
Agencies that cannot hire or train enough people with
foreign language skills borrow them from other agencies or
contract for them.
Congress in 2003 also created the National Virtual
Translation Center, an interagency clearinghouse that lets
agencies share translators with each other or to seek the
services of translators in the private sector and academia.
The center also performs translation work for intelligence
agencies.
Federal contracting for people with language skills has
taken off since 9/11. But as demand has shot up, so have
labor rates.
Before 9/11, a linguist speaking Arabic might get paid $15
or $20 an hour. Now, rates are about double that. And for
those with security clearances and expertise, rates are up to
between $70 and $80 an hour. A contract linguist working in
Iraq now can make $150,000 a year, Hendzel said.
Not all agencies are willing to pay so much, he said. Some
want to settle for $20 an hour and hire someone who can speak
a foreign language but may not be certified or have
experience or expertise in a particular field. By doing that,
Hendzel said agencies risk getting poor-quality work that
could undermine their missions.
“Mistranslation or distortion are as dangerous as a lack
of translation,” he said.
Mr. AKAKA. We all understand the importance of language education and
cultural understanding in this country; we just need to figure out how
we make it happen. I am confident the National Foreign Language
Coordination Council will provide the needed leadership and
coordination to reach our goal.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
July 14 2005
RA PRESIDENT CONGRATULATES FRENCH EMBASSY OFFICIALS ON NATIONAL
HOLIDAY
YEREVAN, July 14. /ARKA/. The RA President Robert Kocharyan and the
First Lady Bella Kocharyan visited the French Embassy in Armenia on
the occasion a French national holiday, Bastille Day. The RA
presidential press service reports that Robert Kocharyan
congratulated the Embassy personnel and expressed confidence that the
warm relations between two countries will successfully develop in the
future as well. A.A. -0–