Author: Nahapetian Samvel

Messenger.ge, Georgia
July 29 2004
Armenia interested in Abkhaz railway
As reported in Mtavari Gazeti, the Armenian delegation visiting
Georgia once again voiced its interest in restoring the Abkhaz
railway. Several months ago, representatives of the Armenian
government said that Armenia is losing millions of dollars because of
the closure of the railway.
Armenians continue to sow the results of Karabakh war even today.
Azerbaijan creates a lot of obstacles in the economic relations with
Russia, the paper reports.
Even though the issue of restoring the Abkhaz railway cannot be
settled without Russia, the Armenian delegation visited Georgia with
this end in view. During this visit, a bilateral commission was set
up which will look into issue of restoring Abkhaz railway. Chair of
the parliamentary committee on the economy Niko Lekishvili told
journalists that Armenia is interested in restoring the Abkhaz
railway and it will help Georgia resolve the Abkhaz conflict.

ArmenPress
July 29 2004
CROSS-STONE FROM ARSHILE GORKY’S HOME BROUGHT TO YEREVAN
YEREVAN, JULY 29, ARMENPRESS: Badal Badalian, the chairman of a
Yerevan-based Arshile Gorky Foundation, showed reporters today a
khachkar (cross-stone) which he said he brought from the village of
Khorgom on the banks of Lake Van in Turkey, the native village of
Arshile Gorky, one of the most famous contemporary artists of the USA
and the founder of Abstract Surrealism.
Badalian said he and another Armenian painter were traveling
across Western Armenia, now in Turkey and visited Gorky’s village,
now populated, as he said, by ethnic Armenians, assimilated by local
Yezidis and were drinking water from a spring in the yard of Gorky’s
home when a stone on the earth caught their sight. A closer look
revealed it was a khachkar.
Yezidis allowed Armenians to take the khachkar, weighing some 100
kg, to Armenia. Badalian said today the cross on the stone might have
been carved by Gorky himself when he was 10 or 11.
Arshile Gorky, described by Andre Breton as the most important
painter in American history, was born in Western Armenia, in. In
1915, Gorky (Vostanik Adoyan) escaped Turkish massacres with
thousands of others refugees. After his mother died of famine, he
headed for the US. His whole life in the new country, which ended in
suicide, consisted of years of hard work and bitter struggle.
Tragically enough, the years in which his art was ascending to its
greatest heights were also the darkest in his life. His marriage was
disintegrating; he was operated on for colon cancer, and he lost many
works in a studio fire.

Wolfowitz, Perle and Feith
One Down – Two To Go
Hellenic news.com
7-26-04
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, former chairman of the
Defense Policy Board Richard Perle and Under Secretary of Defense
Douglas Feith, are the persons in the Defense Department primarily
responsible for the erroneous facts and policy judgments regarding
Turkey to the great detriment of U.S. interests in the region and
worldwide.
Richard Perle
Perle resigned on March 27, 2003 as chairman of the Defense Policy
Board after disclosures that his business dealings included a meeting
with two Saudis, one an arms dealer, and a contract for $750,000 to
advise telecommunications firm Global Crossings Ltd. that was seeking
Defense Department permission to be sold to Chinese investors.
In a New Yorker article, Seymour Hersch reported that Perle faced
conflict of interest between his work on the board and his private
business dealings. He reported that Perle is `a managing partner in a
venture-capital company called Trireme Partners L.P.’ He also reported
that Perle attended a luncheon meeting on January 3, 2004 with two
Saudis, Adnan Khashoggi and industrialist Harle Zuhair, who told
Hersch that the agenda included an item `to pave the way for Zuhair to
put together a group of ten Saudi businessmen who would invest ten
million dollars each in Trireme.’ (New Yorker, March 17, 2003, pages
76-81.)
Perle resigned as Assistant Secretary of Defense in 1987, before the
end of the Cold War, and went to Turkey and negotiated an $800,000
contract for International Advisors Inc. (IAI), a company which he
initiated. He recruited Douglas Feith, his special assistant at
Defense, to head IAI.
Perle became a consultant to IAI and received $48,000 annually from
1989 to 1994. IAI registered as a foreign agent with the Justice
Department. IAI received $800,000 from Turkey in 1989 and then
received $600,000 annually from 1990 to 1994.
Douglas Feith
>From 1989 to 1994, Douglas Feith headed IAI and registered as a
foreign agent for Turkey. He received $60,000 annually and his law
firm Feith and Zell received hundreds of thousands of dollars from IAI
Neither Perle, when he was on the Defense Policy Board, or Feith as
Under Secretary of Defense, recused themselves on matters dealing with
U.S.-Turkey relations.
Feith was Perle’s protégé. According to the Washington Post’s
BobWoodward, ` Feith was not popular with the military. He appeared to
equate policy with paper.’ Woodward wrote that General Tommy Franks
`tried to ignore Feith though it was not easy. The general once
confided to several colleagues about Feith: ` I have to deal with the
[expletive] stupidest guy on the face of the earth almost every day.’
(Woodward, Plan of Attack, p. 281.)
Paul Wolfowitz
Wolfowitz has committed major mistakes of policy and judgment
regarding Turkey to the serious detriment of
U.S. interests. Wolfowitz’s remarks on Turkey have contained false and
misleading statements with serious errors of fact and omission of
Orwellian proportions.
On July 14, 2002, Wolfowitz in a CNN Turkey interview stated:
`I think a real test of whether a country is a democracy is how it
treats its minorities. And actually it’s one of the things that
impress (sic) me about Turkish history-the way Turkey treats its own
minorities.’
How does one respond to such a statement? Armenian, Greek and Kurdish
Americans have expressed their outrage. See Exhibit 1 to AHI joint
letter of September 4, 2002 on AHI website at for a
list of Turkey’sviolations of the human rights of its minorities
committed throughout the 20th century, a number of which continue up
to the present time.
Also on July 14, 2002, in a speech at the Conrad Hotel, Istanbul,
Wolfowitz referred to Turkey:
`as a staunch NATO ally through forty years of Cold Warâ=80¦.Itis the
great good fortune of the United States, of NATO, the West, indeed the
world, that occupying this most important crossroads we have one of
our strongest, most reliable and most self-reliant allies.’
This is another false and misleading statement by Wolfowitz with
serious errors of fact and omission. The record shows that during the
Cold War, Turkey brushed aside U.S. interests on many occasions and
deliberately gave substantial assistance to the Soviet military. See
Exhibit 2 of the September 4, 2002 letter which sets forth examples of
Turkey’s unreliability as an ally and refutes the assertion of Turkey
as a self-reliant ally. Turkey’s vote on March 1, 2003 refusing to
allow U.S. troops to use bases in Turkey to open a second front
against the Saddam Hussein dictatorship is a dramatic example of
Turkey’s unreliability as an ally. Wolfowitz’s effusive comments in
his July 14, 2002 speech regarding Ataturk may play well in Turkey,
but the rest of the world is familiar with Ataturkas a brutal dictator
and mass killer of Armenians, Greeks and Kurds. John Gunther in his
book, Inside Europe refers in his opening sentence to Ataturk as
â=80=9CThe blond, blue-eyed combination of patriot and psychopath who
is dictator of Turkey.’ (1938 edition p. 378.) See Exhibit 3 of the
September 4, 2002 letter for the details of Ataturk’s mass killings of
Armenians, Greeks and Kurds. Ataturk and Turkey are hardly the models,
as suggested by Wolfowitz, for Afghanistan and other Muslim nations to
follow to achieve democracy.
In his July 14, 2002 speech Wolfowitz also stated:
`When the ?illness’ of international terrorism struck the United
States last September, Turkey quickly offered unconditional
support…’
Wolfowitz conveniently omits the fact that Turkey is an international
terrorist state by virtue of its aggression against Cyprus in 1974,
and a national terrorist state by its actions of ethnic cleansing,
crimes against humanityand genocide against its 20 percent Kurdish
minority. The double standard on the rule of law and international and
national terrorism that the U.S. applies to Turkey damages the U.S.’s
war on international terrorism and makes a mockery of our moral and
legal positions. See Exhibit 4 of the September 4, 2002 letter which
discusses Turkey as an international and national terrorist state.
Wolfowitz refers often to Turkey’s democracy. The fact is
otherwise. Turkey is still a military-dominated government, in which
the military controls foreign affairs and national security policy and
has harmful influence overdomestic affairs. There is an absence in
Turkey of minority rights, human rights, press freedom, speech freedom
and religious freedom. Falsehoods and myths regarding Turkey’s
democracy have been propagated for years by Defense and State
Department officials. Freedom House in its 2003 annual report calls
Turkey only part-free.
On March 13, 2002, in a speech to the Washington Institute for Near
East Policy, Wolfowitz failed to recognize that Turkey violated the
NATO Treaty by its invasion of Cyprus and that the violation continues
to this day. See Exhibit 6 of the September 4, 2002 letter which
discusses Turkey’s violation of the North Atlantic Treaty by its
invasion of Cyprus.
The false and misleading statements made by Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz
on Turkey raise serious questions as to his credibility and the
factual basis of his advice to the President and Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld on other issues such as Iraq.
The U.S. double standard policy toward Turkey on the rule of law and
the appeasement of Turkey these past decades, pursued by a handful of
Defense and State Department officials and Turkey’s paid foreign
agents, have seriously damaged U.S. national interests. President
Bush said `enough is enough’ regarding the violence in the Middle
East. The President, in the interests of the U.S., should tell his
advisors that `enough is enough’ regarding Turkey’s aggression and
occupation in Cyprus, its genocide against the Kurds, its blockade of
humanitarian aid to Armenia, its national torture policy, its
thousands of political prisoners, its jailing of journalists, the lack
of religious freedom, its denial of the Armenian Genocide and the
Turkish military’s control of national security and foreign policy and
its harmful influence on domestic policy.
Secretary Rumsfeld should ask for the resignations of Wolfowitz and
Feith.
Gene Rossides is President
of the American Hellenic Institute
and former Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Tacy Ltd., Israel
July 25 2004
ADAMAS PLANS 2ND SYNTHETIC DIAMOND LINE

By the end of this year Belarussian state unitary enterprise Adamas
plans to launch a second line for producing synthetic diamonds,
doubling production capacity to 8,000 carats per annum.
In addition, Adamas plans to launch new technology that will double
the potential weight of diamonds produced to 1.5 carats, and may also
double production capacity. This development program is expected to
cost some US$3.25 million.
The company says that demand for its synthetic diamonds currently
exceeds supply. Consumers of Adamas products include Kristall of
Gomel in Belarus, Russia, Armenia, Iran, South Korea and Japan.

Main Gate, Magazine of the American University of Beirut
Spring Vol I, No. 3
Woman of the Year
Alumnus Mary Najarian (RN ’55) has spent much of the last twenty
years working day and night to improve medical care in Armenia.
Attending a gala in her honor, Lynn Mahoney finds in the woman an
inspiring mix of courage, humility, and dedication.
There are tributes, and then there are tributes.
So I discovered in Los Angeles the evening of February 2, 2004. It
happened to be Superbowl Sunday, a tough night in the United States
to draw a crowd to any event without the lure of a wide screen
television broadcast of the game. But as I realized while watching
the large crowd arrive to recognize her twenty years of humanitarian
service in Armenia, Mary Najarian is no ordinary woman.
Some 500 hundred friends and members of family filled the George
Deukmejian Ballroom at the Ararat Home in Los Angeles. Each table was
lavishly spread with mezzeh and flowers, as well as with a charming
selection of Armenian folk dolls and prayer beads donated by
Najarian. As we all sat down for dinner, the heartfelt laudatory
speeches began. Each speaker commented on how Najarian had touched
the lives of so many people in Armenia, as well as their own – a
profound tribute to a woman who makes no fuss about her vital work
and has no expectations of recognition.
Mary Najarian’s humanitarian activities in Armenia began in 1984,
while the country was still under the heavy yoke of the former Soviet
Union and entry was close to impossible for foreigners. Just one year
after that visit, she and her husband, Vartkes Najarian (MD ’57)
founded Medical Outreach for Armenians, which since then has raised,
donated, and transported over 46 million dollars worth of medical and
surgical supplies to Armenia and Karabagh.
Najarian’s commitment to improving medical care in Armenia has been
extraordinary, and the extent of it was personally relayed during the
dinner by her friends and family, particularly by her beautiful
daughter Maro Yacoubian, who totally shares her mother’s dedication.
She told of countless late nights, phone calls to Armenia at all
hours, and the hard work of preparing the shipments of medical
supplies. In fact, Maro noted, her parents’ labor of love consumed so
much of their time that it was not until January 2004 that they took
their first vacation ever – a cruise around the Caribbean.
Commenting on the tributes, Najarian observed with characteristic
understatement, `It makes you feel good…it’s so encouraging to know
people appreciate what you have done. That I am a woman and was able
to accomplish as much as I have makes a difference, too. You know,
Armenia is a man’s world, and it is hard for women to open doors.’
Mary and Vartkes Najarian have taken a decidedly hands-on approach to
medical outreach. In 1985, Vartkes himself carried the first
arthroscopic set to Armenia and taught the local physicians knee
surgery using the latest medical equipment. Mary, on her part,
personally supervised the renovation of an operating room and trained
nurses in the aseptic technique.
`My nursing education at AUB was a huge help in my relief efforts. As
a nurse, I worked side by side with my husband. I would check
supplies while in the field and find out what is needed,’ she said,
reflecting on her education. `The training at AUB was and is still
superior to anything I have seen, especially in surgical nursing.’
It was during the first trips to Armenia that she saw just how far
behind the hospitals were on modern surgical techniques. `It was like
being in the Middle Ages,’ she recalled. `It took Vartkes and me
three to four weeks to get the doctors trained in aseptic techniques –
before that they didn’t even wear facemasks or scrub for surgery.’
The war in Karabagh brought new challenges for the Najarians. Medical
Outreach for Armenia, the non-profit organization they founded to
improve healthcare in Armenia, continued sending medical supplies
from Los Angeles when the war started, but as the number of
casualties rose, they simply had to go to Armenia to help. `Vartkes
and I traveled to the war zone and worked there. This was the hardest
challenge of all.’
Once in Karabagh, they literally worked in the trenches, as wounded
soldiers were brought in from the battlefield. `There were no
hospitals in the war zone. We operated in tunnels with flashlights
that would only work for 20 minutes and Vartkes would be performing
surgery on the floor.’ She tells how saddening it was to see these
young men, many of them only 18 or 19 years old, suffer. `They were
kids and would usually stay with us for a week recovering. Later,
they would return with their parents to thank us – that, in itself, was
payment enough for our hard work.’
Throughout those difficult war years, while continuing to return to
Armenia to assist with surgeries, the Najarians also kept sending
cartloads of medical supplies gathered from top pharmaceutical and
surgical equipment companies – in one year alone they shipped 50
containers to Karabagh. `The Armenian medical community was just
astounded – they had never seen so many new medications in such
quantities before,’ she exclaimed.
Considering her many travels to Armenia, Najarian’s dedication is
obvious. She has been to Armenia 46 times and Karabagh 22 times – at
the rate of two or three times a year, especially during the war for
stays of two to six weeks.
One of her greatest accomplishments, which she modestly mentions, is
her work at the Veterans Hospital in Yerevan. `The conditions were
unbelievably bad. There were eight to ten patients to a room, with
the beds all connected. There was no running water except for two
hours a day. The toilets were horrible – there was one toilet for every
50 patients and you could not get in and out without carrying traces
of fecal matter.’ Medical Outreach for Armenians renovated seven
floors in the hospital, in addition to three annex floors. Bathrooms
were constructed as well with one for each ward of five patients
along with more bedrooms for patients. Operating rooms were
modernized with equipment from the US.

But there is still much work to be done, says Najarian. `While the
Veterans Hospital has improved tremendously and can now provide
proper medical care for the military and their families, it is not
available to the poor and the needy. Many patients go to the hospital
to die because that is all they can afford to do,’ she explains.
`This causes me much pain.’
Not surprisingly, the Najarians are determined to find a way to fix
this problematic situation, much as they did with renovating the
Veterans Hospital. `We are planning to establish a hospital, equipped
with foreign doctors working on a volunteer basis to provide free
health care for those who need it.’ What they are lacking, however,
is the facility. `I am determined to insist in the Armenian
newspapers that the government must provide us with a building. I
feel I have not accomplished anything until the public has free
access to medical care.’
Until then, the Najarians will continue with letters to the
government and rallying the support of the American medical community
to establish the hospital. And the shipments of medical supplies will
go on. `We have been lucky in getting out a container every two to
three weeks. And we can support a hospital, if given the chance.’
Najarian also shared memories of her student days: `The University
was very prestigious. To say you were an AUB student was something
big.’ She arrived at AUB with three very close friends from the
American School in Aleppo, Syria – Angie Bahuth, Adrin Beheler, and
Knarig Méyer. Their first year was not only special academically but
personally as well. `We all met our boyfriends then,’ Najarian notes,
laughing. No rivalries existed between the women and they lived like
sisters, encouraging each other and always helping one another in a
pinch. Throughout the years, those friendships have remained strong
and precious to Najarian – and to the other women as well. This was
apparent in the touching account Angie Bahuth gave of their AUB days
and in the high respect and admiration she expressed for Najarian at
the dinner, which was organized largely through her efforts.
Najarian considers AUB the major stepping stone that enabled her and
her friends to go to America and support themselves there. She likes
to tell people that she went from Beirut to Chicago with only 90
cents in her pocket, with which she purchased a bowl of chili with
some saltines, `The absolute best!’ she recalls. In no time at all,
she found work at Wesley Memorial Hospital and they paid her tuition
to go to Northwestern University for additional schooling. By then,
she and Vartkes had married and the couple moved to Cleveland, Ohio,
where they stayed for twenty years. There, she became the mother of
three boys and one girl, who all grew up to become successful
professionals. For the last twenty-five years, the family has lived
in southern California.
It is not surprising that Najarian should care so much for the
welfare of others. Her early years were a time of severe hardship for
the family. She grew up poor, but very much loved, the child of
parents who fled Armenia during the genocide. Despite limited
financial circumstances, giving was a tradition deeply rooted in the
family. `My sister and I once won a cash prize award at school, and
we were so happy. On our return home, my father congratulated us, but
said we had to give the money to others in the community who needed
it more. This is where I got my philanthropy from,’ she recalls.
Turning her thoughts to nursing education, Najarian says, `I find it
disappointing that not many Armenian girls are enrolled in AUB’s
Nursing School today. We need to draw more young women into the
program. There is such a huge nursing shortage in the United States,
and what I want is for AUB to prepare nurses for job placement in
America.’
Najarian feels so strongly about the matter that, true to form, she
is thinking of launching a grass roots effort to help. `I will simply
go into the high schools in Beirut or Aleppo, where I graduated from
high school and persuade the young women to consider a career in
nursing and apply to AUB. I am positive we can find them financial
assistance as needed.’
The tribute came to an end following speeches from leaders in the Los
Angeles and Armenian-American community, as well as friends and
family. The AUB Alumni Association of North America presented
Najarian with a resolution commending her humanitarian service.
All without exception dwelled upon the humanitarian essence of her
work to improve the quality of medical care in Armenia, as they spoke
of the many ways in which this one woman had touched and enhanced the
lives of countless people, patients and doctors alike. Watching her
face glow during this gratifying show of respect, admiration, and
affection, one was also made to realize the extent to which Mary
Najarian’s modesty, compassion, and tireless dedication have made her
an inspiration to all those who know her.

ARMENIA’s GREENS DEMAND PUNISHMENT OF OFFICIALS
YEREVAN, JULY 24. ARMINFO. A number of Armenian environmental
organizations demand that the current and former mayors of Yerevan,
former chief architect, as well as Government officials, who
contributed to mass destruction of green zones in Yerevan, be held
responsible.
At his press conference, the representative of the Social Ecological
Party of Armenia Armen Dovlatyan stated that environmental
organizations demand that the RA Government and Yerevan Municipality
put an end to all illegal and “Legal’ allotments of lands for
construction in Yerevan’s green zones. They also demand the
restoration of the greenery destroyed as a result of construction.
According to Dovlatyan, the forests in Nork are deliberately being
destroyed for the purpose of further construction there. He said that
some of the forests are no longer under the jurisdiction of the
“ArmForest” CJSC, as construction is not allowed in territories under
the jurisdiction of the “ArmForest” CJSC. Dovlatyan stated that over
1,500 of 2,000 hectares of Yerevan’s green zones have been
destroyed. He stressed that over 1,000 hectares were destroyed in
1995-2003. “If the destruction of Yerevan’s green zones continues, the
capital will turn from semi-desert into a desert, which will affect
the population’s health,” he said.

DRAWING OF FIRST CHAPTER OF NATIONAL ATLAS OF ARMENIA WILL BE COMPLETED
WITHIN 3-4 MONTHS
YEREVAN, JULY 23. ARMINFO. Works on drawing of the first chapter of
the National Atlas of Armenia will be completed within the coming 3-4
months, Head of the Governmental State Real Estate Registered Manuk
Vardanyan said at a press-conference today.
He said that simultanously with the first chapter, the second one is
prepared. 60% of the works are over, the remaining part will be
completed in 2005. Vardanyan said that the Register completed all the
works on cartography in the country’s communities within 3
months. Only 5 communities of the country have not been mapped, there
works there will be completed in 2-3 months. Besides, establishment of
a state geodesic network was of great importance for cartography,
which, in its turn, became possible due to the stations of satellite
orientation system. Due to this network, 35% of the country’s
territory was photographed. 50 pages of the maps have already been
drawn no space photos.

Interfax
July 21 2004
No compromise acceptable in Nagorno-Karabakh – Aliyev
BAKU. July 21 (Interfax) – During a visit to a border checkpoint in
Khudata in northern Azerbaijan, President Ilham Aliyev said his
country will make no concessions in settling the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict.
Aliyev said that negotiations with Armenia on Nagorno-Karabakh have
produced no results and the OSCE and other international
organizations have been calling for compromise to settle the
conflict.
“The question of making compromises on the issue of restoring the
country’s territorial integrity cannot be discussed,” Aliyev said.
Azerbaijan lost control of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven neighboring
districts in a bloody conflict with Armenia in the 1990s. The UN
Security Council has denounced Armenia’s occupation of Azerbaijani
lands and has demanded that it withdraw its forces. The OSCE Minsk
Group, composed of representatives from the U.S., Russia and France,
is working to help settle the conflict.

Le Figaro, France
20 juillet 2004
Un grand pays musulman tourné vers l’Europe
par Dominique REYNIE
Nous publions la suite de la tribune du politologue Dominique Reynié
parue dans nos éditions d’hier.
En Turquie, le choix de l’Europe est ancien. La version moderne de
cette option est visible à la fin du XIXe siècle. Les élites
ottomanes se tournent alors vers nous. C’est l’origine immédiate de
la révolution kémaliste, celle qui instaure un Etat républicain et
laïc, le 23 octobre 1923, selon un modèle largement inspiré de la
France. En 1926, c’est un Code civil et un Code pénal importés de
Suisse et d’Allemagne que l’on substitue au droit coranique. En 1949,
la Turquie rejoint le Conseil de l’Europe (où elle siège depuis 2001
au côté de l’Arménie). A partir de 1952, la Turquie est le seul pays
musulman de l’Alliance atlantique, et personne, ni alors ni depuis,
n’a posé la question de la compatibilité culturelle ou géographique.
En 1954, elle ratifie la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme
et des libertés fondamentales, ce qui ne l’empêchera pas de la
bafouer souvent par la suite.
En 1959, la Communauté économique européenne entame des négociations
visant à faire de la Turquie un Etat membre associé et, en 1963, la
Turquie bénéficie du premier accord d’association avec un pays tiers.
Son fameux article 28 prévoit que « les parties contractantes
examineront la possibilité de l’accession de la Turquie à la
Communauté ». En 1970, la Turquie et la CEE signent un nouvel accord
prévoyant à terme l’adhésion complète. En 1973, la Communauté et la
Turquie lancent un processus d’intégration croissante de leurs
marchés. En 1987, la Turquie reconnaît à ses citoyens le droit de
porter plainte auprès de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme de
Strasbourg, acceptant ainsi de soumettre les décisions de l’Etat au
droit européen. Le 14 avril 1987, la Turquie devient officiellement
candidate. En 1989, la Commission déclare qu’elle peut se porter
candidate. En 1990, le Conseil fait de même, tout en refusant
d’ouvrir des négociations pour l’adhésion. En 1995, au terme du
processus commun entamé en 1973, un traité d’union douanière associe
la Turquie à l’Union européenne.
Seul pays non membre à intégrer le marché unique, la Turquie
applique, depuis le 1er janvier 2001, les mêmes droits de douane que
l’Union à l’égard des pays tiers. Le Parlement européen ratifie cet
accord en le conditionnant à l’adoption de réformes démocratiques par
le Parlement turc.
En mars 1998, la Commission adopte le document « Stratégie européenne
pour la Turquie », définissant une procédure de préadhésion
conduisant Ankara à harmoniser sa législation avec celle de l’Union
et à reprendre progressivement l’acquis communautaire. En juin 1998,
au sommet de Cardiff, la Turquie n’est cependant pas admise à adhérer
avec les dix autres pays (la déception des Turcs n’empêchera pas le
premier ministre Recep Tayyip Erdogan de se rendre à Dublin pour
participer aux cérémonies de célébration de l’élargissement, le 1er
mai dernier). La Commission propose alors d’assister la Turquie dans
la préparation de sa candidature. En 1999, le Conseil européen
d’Helsinki reconnaît la Turquie comme pays candidat. Enfin, le 12
décembre 2002, lors du Conseil européen de Copenhague chargé
d’entériner le passage à vingt-cinq membres, l’Union décide de
repousser au 4 décembre 2004 l’ouverture des négociations d’adhésion
avec la Turquie. Les encouragements adressés par l’Europe se
poursuivent. Ainsi, du 28 février 2002 au 10 juillet 2003, la
Convention européenne comprenait une représentation turque, présente
au titre de pays candidat.
Non seulement la candidature de la Turquie est presque aussi ancienne
que l’Union, mais les liens économiques, stratégiques et militaires
qui nous unissent sont de plus en plus étroits. Comme hier, nous
avons ensemble lutté contre le communisme, nous devons aujourd’hui
combattre ensemble le terrorisme. Serait-il raisonnable d’envisager
la lutte contre un fléau planétaire largement inspiré par un
islamisme fondamentaliste et antioccidental en se privant du soutien
de l’unique grand pays musulman, moderne et ardemment pro-européen ?
La constance de l’orientation européenne de la Turquie révèle la
nature fondamentale de son choix, dans le prolongement de l’option
kémaliste, laïque et républicaine. Aujourd’hui, la marche vers
l’adhésion commande le passage à une ère post-kémaliste, dans un
double mouvement : d’abord, par le dépassement de sa dimension
nationaliste, parce que l’adhésion suppose un abandon partiel de
souveraineté (on n’a pas assez remarqué que le gouvernement turc a
beaucoup concédé sur la question chypriote et sur la question kurde,
opérant une véritable révolution de portée diplomatique autant que
politique) ; ensuite, par l’abandon de sa nature autoritaire, dans la
promotion d’une démocratisation sans retour qui répondra à la demande
d’émancipation portée par la société civile. La croissance économique
de la Turquie est la véritable réponse à ceux qui redoutent une
immigration massive. Les Turcs aussi préfèrent vivre et travailler
chez eux.
Le 4 décembre 2004, il ne s’agira pas de décider de l’adhésion de la
Turquie, mais de l’ouverture des négociations en vue de l’adhésion.
L’accord d’adhésion dépendra de la capacité de la Turquie à se
conformer aux critères de Copenhague. Cela prendra du temps, dix ans,
peut-être quinze. Ce temps sera nécessaire, car bien des problèmes
devront être réglés, depuis la situation des femmes, qui reste très
préoccupante, jusqu’à la question kurde, en passant par la nécessaire
résorption du contentieux enkysté autour de la reconnaissance du
génocide des Arméniens, en 1915. L’ouverture des négociations en vue
de l’adhésion proprement dite vise précisément à donner ce temps, à
accompagner, encourager et soutenir le peuple turc dans les efforts
importants qu’il entreprend depuis longtemps pour devenir un membre à
part entière de l’Union. Sachons être compréhensifs et ne perdons pas
de vue que nous exigeons de ce pays un réformisme sans commune mesure
avec celui dont nos sociétés sont désormais capables, nous
qu’effarouche la moindre remise en cause de l’une de nos habitudes.
En acceptant d’ouvrir les négociations en vue d’une adhésion future
de la Turquie, l’Europe apportera la démonstration qu’il est possible
de construire un projet commun à partir de nos histoires et de nos
cultures, à la fois proches et différentes, distinctes et si
étroitement mêlées, loin du conflit des civilisations qui laisserait
à nos enfants un champ de ruines en héritage. Avec la Turquie,
l’Europe sera incomparablement plus riche et plus puissante. Elle
augmentera sensiblement ses chances de devenir un acteur majeur de la
scène mondiale. Elle sera plus proche d’Israël, plus capable de
favoriser le règlement de la question palestinienne, plus apte
qu’aujourd’hui à peser sur l’avenir du Proche et du Moyen-Orient.
Elle rayonnera jusqu’en Asie. Peut-être plus que tout, l’ouverture
des négociations offrira enfin aux pays musulmans une alternative
heureuse. Ce ne sera ni simple ni rapide, mais les oeuvres qui
comptent le sont-elles jamais ? Pour une Europe empêtrée,
vieillissante, conservatrice et si craintive, si nostalgique de sa
grandeur passée, y a-t-il plus belle occasion de renouer avec la vie
et de reprendre part à la marche du monde ?
DOMINIQUE REYNIÉ * Professeur des Universités à l’Institut d’études
politiques de Paris. Dernières publications : Les Européens en 2004,
Paris, 2004, Editions Odile Jacob/Fondation Robert Schuman et La
Fracture occidentale. Naissance d’une opinion européenne, Paris,
2004, Editions de la Table Ronde.

FORTHCOMING REFORMS OF ELECTORAL LEGISLATION OF ARMENIA MUST AIM TO
ENSURE ELECTORAL ADMINISTRATION: GAREGIN AZARIAN
YEREVAN, JULY 20. ARMINFO. The forthcoming reforms of the electoral
legislation of Armenia must aim to ensure electoral administration for
conducting free and fair elections. Chairman of the Central Electoral
Commission of Armenia Garegin Azarian told ARMINFO.
According to him, CEC has prepared a whole package of proposals
concerning the reformation of the Electoral Code of Armenia and if the
National Assembly wants to hear the opinion of the CEC when discussing
the package of reforms of the Electoral Code, then he is ready to
introduce the deputies with his considerations. Azarian thinks that it
is necessary to supply all the electoral districts with computers, and
negotiations is being conducting with OSCE concerning this
problem. Retraining of members of local and regional electoral
committees is necessary, the head of the Central Electoral Commission
of Armenia thinks, and not the political parties, but the power must
appoint the members of the electoral committees. Garegin Azarian is
surprised with the fact that no political party of the country except
the party “New times”, headed by Aram Karapetian, has not expressed a
desire yet to meet and discuss with them the changes in the Electoral
Code.
Concerning the proposals of the Venice Commission of the Council of
Europe concerning the reforms of the electoral system in Armenia
Garegin Azarian informed that he knows them and agree with them almost
100% except the sentence to take a finger-print from the electors.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress