BAKU: Azerbaijani And Armenian Foreign Ministers Due To Meet In Stra

AZERBAIJANI AND ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTERS DUE TO MEET IN STRASBOURG

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
May 8 2007

Azerbaijani and Armenian Foreign Ministers are expected to meet in
Strasbourg on May 11, diplomatic sources told APA.

Azerbaijani FM Elmar Mammadyarov and his counterpart Vardan Oskainan
are to participate in the 117th session of the Committee of Ministers
of the Council of Europe.

Azerbaijan and Armenian Foreign Minsiters are expected to meet at
this time. The Foreign Ministries of the two countries have already
approved the participation of the two ministers in the session.

OSCE Minsk co-chairman from Russia Yuri Merzlyakov exclusively told
APA the co-chairs will separately meet with Azerbaijan and Armenian
Foreign Ministers in Strasbourg.

The meetings will cover the current situation of negotiations on
Nagorno Karabakh issue, talks of OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs with Anhel
Moratinos, OSCE Chairman-in-Office on May 10, Anhel Morhatino’s visit
to Azerbaijan and Armenia on June 4 and 5, the planned meeting of
Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents’ in St Petersburg on June 10.

Acting Press-Secretary Of Armenian Foreign Ministry: In Present Cond

ACTING PRESS-SECRETARY OF ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY: IN PRESENT CONDITIONS TURKEY’S INITIATIVE TO DIRECT OBSERVERS TO ARMENIA LOOKS A LITTLE BIT STRANGE

Arminfo Agency News
2007-05-09 16:14:00

In the conditions of the lasting blockade of Armenia by Turkey and its
refusal to set diplomatic relations with Armenia Turkey’s initiative
to direct observers over the parliamentary election to Armenia looks a
little bit strange, the acting press-secretary of Armenian FM Vladimir
Karapetyan at the press-conference organized by information agency
Armenpress today.

He also added that Armenia is sorry for the fact that taking into
account absence of relations between the two states Turkey did
not show the needed understanding of the problem of its observers
direction to Armenia. Turkey cannot choose what kind of relations it
wants or does not want to have with Armenia. Political and diplomatic
relations are not the subject of choice. , – Vladimir Karapetyan said.

ANKARA: Republican Virginia Foxx To Young Turks

REPUBLICAN VIRGINIA FOXX TO YOUNG TURKS

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
May 9 2007

Republican Representative of N.C., Congresswoman Virginia Foxx: "Get
involved on the local level. Possibly work for somebody’s campaign.

You get on the inside and you see what it’s like to run a campaign."

Republican Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina is among the
Congress members friendly to Turkey. Even more, she has blood ties
with Turks because her son-in-law is a Turkish businessman, Mustafa
Ozdemir. She is the third woman in North Carolina history to serve
in the U.S. House. She is known for her conservative values and she
was also one of just 38 Republicans to score a 100 percent approval
rating from the American Conservative Union.

Congresswoman Foxx is also a member of the Caucus on U.S.-Turkish
Relations, which has 62 members. Foxx began her career as a secretary
and research assistant at University of NC-Chapel Hill. Prior to
serving on Capitol Hill, Foxx spent ten years in the North Carolina
Senate. Since serving in the House, she has received attention for
her energy and hard work. Her campaign finances shows how hard she
works to fundraise. She received 66 percent of her campaign finance
from individuals while the other members collected 53 percent.

She said her secret is making a lot of phone calls. Even if she
used her Blackberry to write e-mail very fast while we talked, she
complained about not writing as fast as she does at computer —
90 words in a minute! She is not only an energetic, hyper active
politician, but also thrilled about her grand children. She loves to
talk about them and she says even though some people make fun of her,
she insists on carrying very big pictures of Rana and Kenan.

While she was visiting New York, Foxx answered TURKOFAMERICA’s
Editor-in-Chief’s questions, from the issues of PKK to Armenian
resolutions, from the economy to Turkish-American relations.

The so-called Armenian Genocide has been an annual ritual in the
House every term. This year also it will be important issue again.

What will you do and what can Turkish people do about this matter?

If the Armenian resolution comes up for vote, I will vote no. I am
talking to my colleagues who have not yet signed the resolution,
encouraging them to oppose it. I have even talked to congressmen
who have already signed the resolution to ask them to withdraw their
names. Because I don’t think this is the right thing to do. Turkish
people can write them, the members of Congress. First of all, they
should write, if the members of Congress signed on, to explain why
should take their name off. If they have not signed on they should say
to them why they shouldn’t sign and why they should talk to colleagues
about getting off the resolution.

Do you think sending e-mail or writing a letter is enough?

A phone call is enough too. A legible handwritten letter is the
most effective thing to do. There is a problem about mail coming in
Washington, D.C. in a hurry because mail has to go through security
checks. So often there is a delay of 2-3 weeks. Also faxing is a
good idea. Not a lot of members read their e-mails, their staff
read e-mails.

Is sending the same letter to all Congress members effective?

That’s not effective. A personal handwritten letter is the key. If you
write it in your own words. Just cutting and pasting and emailing,
that seems silly. What people need is to get something that is
personal and sincere. I get e-mails sometime, the same message 2000
times. That’s basically a form letter. It’s not a personal letter. It
didn’t take any effort for the person to do. They just cut and paste
it, then forward it. That’s why a personal letter is so important. A
handwritten letter means you did that. You took the time to write
that letter. You have an investment in that issue. If you just do cut
and paste and forward, it’s easy. You have no personal investment in
that issue. You might have a personal investment. You did not make
any effort to do that. So you may or may not make an effort to vote.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is known as a pro-Armenian. Is this
a disadvantage on this issue for Turkish people?

The Speaker of House is very powerful when it comes to appeals coming
up to vote. The Chairman of the committee is very powerful. You
won’t get a bill heard unless the Chairman wants to hear it. If the
Speaker wants to hear it doesn’t matter what the Chairman wants. The
Speaker is going to prevail. The Speaker is all powerful when it
comes for voting. The Speaker sets the schedule for the bills heard
in committee. The Speaker sets the schedule for the bill coming to
the Floor and very few people of a party will go against what the
Speaker wants.

Turkey has been battling the PKK since the 1980’s and the U.S.

accepted that the PKK is a terrorist organization in 1987. After
March 1st 2003, Turkey was a little distressed by the U.S. policy on
Iraq. Will the U.S. make any effort to defeat the PKK? What should
be done?

I met about a week ago with representatives from the State Department
and they are quietly aware of the sensitivity in this area. They
also want very much for Turkey to remain a strong U.S. ally. They
understand how important the Armenian resolution is, and the issue of
the PKK, to Turks. Also, they understand that the PKK is a terrorist
organization. They want to help do something about that. I think it is
appropriate for Turkey to continue to press on the issue of the PKK,
but not to be discouraged by the current response, because there is
a highest level great sensitivity on this issue even if there has
not a lot been set about.

Do you think something changed after March 2003 because Turkey didn’t
allow the U.S. troops to use its land to invade Iraq?

I have not heard that from anyone. It’s not come up as an issue.

Turkey is a sovereign nation obviously. It has to handle internal
political issues itself and we understand that. And I think that you
can see by the way the President has been handling the Iraq situation
that he has been doing everything possible to let the Iraqis make
their own decisions without the U.S. making decisions for them. I
think he has the same attitude for Turkey. We can’t go in and tell
the Turkish government what to do. I have not sensed any feeling of
retaliation on the part of the U.S.

You voted no on the resolution about Iraq. What is the solution for
Iraq? Why did you vote no?

The constitution is very clear. We have one Commander-in-Chief. That
is the President of the U.S. The Congress gave the President the
authority to fight the war against radical jihad. If Congress wants
to stop the war, the Congress should vote to stop the war. Not a
non-binding resolution. It’s a chicken’s way out or a chicken’s way
of dealing with a tough situation. If George Washington had listened
to his critics, if Abraham Lincoln had listened to his critics, if
FDR or Truman had listened to the critics, we wouldn’t be a sovereign
nation start with. We would be a split nation maybe speaking German.

The President is never going to be at war if everybody does not
support it. There are differences of opinion in our country. We have
a way of dealing with that.

The way our constitution provides us to do that. That resolution
sent a bad message to terrorists and our troops. I voted no because
of that. I wish we would not be at war. I don’t know any American who
wants to be at war but we are at war. We should prosecute that war as
strongly as we possibly can. The President should have gone in and
taken out the bad guys as quickly as possible. Something you start,
better you finish it and do it as quickly as possible.

If the Iraq war continues in this way, will it have a negative impact
on the 2008 election for Republicans?

It might or it might not. The 2008 election is 16 months away. A
lot can happen in that period. The policy could work very positively
and it’s looking that way and it will be very good for Republicans. I
don’t expect the media to ever portray things going well in the war or
accurately. Because the media are against the war, even if nothing bad
is happening, they are going to find something bad. Since the surge
began, it’s been going a lot better. But what did they do? They go
find negative news in Afghanistan. Put that on front page. We will
never get a fair assessment of the war from the mainstream media in
the U.S. We don’t expect that. They will try to reelect Democrats.

Are you saying that, even if the Republican administration is doing
good things for the economy, events in Iraq overshadow them?

We have the best economy we have had in 50 years. Everything good
is at the top; every thing bad is the bottom. Have you ever read
anything about how good the economy is? No, never. Also a study
has been done about how the media portrayed the economy under
Bush compared to Clinton. Same data under Clinton, the portrait is
wonderful. Under Bush it is portrayed so negatively. Let’s say under
the Clinton administration the unemployment rate is 5 percent. The
headline would be "unemployment rate hits new low. Clinton policy is
responsible." Same thing happened under Bush administration.

"Unemployment rate is 4.5 despite Bush policy." New job creation —
we now have had 39 months of positive growth in job creations. But
they said that they are not real jobs. They are service jobs.

Is it hard to get elected as a woman candidate?

It is hard, especially as a Republican woman. There are a lot more
Democratic women in Congress. In the last election we lost some
seats as well. An interesting thing about women in the House is in
all history 290 women served in the House. All together, 90 of them
are serving now.

If you are reelected in 2008, what will be on your agenda?

I’ll take my lead from my district. It depends on what things are
important in my district. The fact we are called representatives
is very important. We represent our area. My focus has to be on my
district which I represent. I obviously have a national interest too.

So I believe that we will still be dealing with, again, terrorists
who want to destroy us. I don’t think that is going to go away in 2
years. I will always be concerned about the economy and how badly
it affects my district and how it affects North Carolina. I will
always be concerned about the general health of the U.S. in terms
of where we stand. The number one role of the federal government is
national defense. So that should always be the number one priority
in the Congress. But what is good for the U.S., is going to be good
for my district.

When I take a look at your campaign finances, in the period of
2005-2006, the total received was 2.4 million dollars. 63 percent of
the money came from individuals. In the 2000 elections, winning U.S.

House candidates collected 52 percent from individuals. Your average
is higher than the other representatives. In addition your personal
fund is 0. What is your secret?

I don’t pay attention to the ratio. I just try to raise money. The
secret is making a lot of telephone calls. I do a lot of personal
telephone calls. I am known as the hardest working person in the
Congress. I work very hard for the Congress. That is, the policy
issues; I also work very hard fund raising. We have a lot of very
small fund raisers in people’s houses. We have 20 small fund raisers
planned in my district or close to the district. I haven’t had many
fund raisers out of N.C. but I will have if the opportunity appears.

For example I will be in Miami to meet two different groups of
people. They are not large fund raisers.

Do you have any advice for young Turks who want to get involved in
political system?

The first thing to do is getting involved with a local party. Where
you begin at local levels. Get involved on the local level. Possibly
work for somebody’s campaign. You get on the inside and you see what
it’s like to run a campaign. Stop paying attention to what’s going
on nationally. Be involved with not only political activity but with
business organizations. Networking is very important. Getting to
know people when you start raising money. You go first — what fund
raisers tell you is go to the Christmas card list of your family.

Asking them to raise money. The first time when I raised money in
N.C. I had about 100 people, I raised 10,000 dollars. There were
friends of mine everywhere, I wrote them letters asking them to
contribute. Networking, which is something Turks do very well.

Can secular Turkey survive democracy?

Can secular Turkey survive democracy?

How reformists can stop the Islamists who have chipped away at Turkey’s
secularism.

Los Angeles Times
By Ayaan Hirsi Ali

AYAAN HIRSI ALI, a former Dutch legislator and women’s activist who now
lives in the U.S., recently published her memoir, "Infidel."

May 9, 2007

SECULAR AND LIBERAL Turks have had a rude awakening from years of deep
slumber. Kemal Ataturk’s heritage is about to be destroyed – not by an
invading power but from within, by fellow Turks who yearn for an Islamic
state.

Ever since Ataturk, Turkey has been divided into those who want to run state
affairs on Islamic principles and those who want to keep Allah’s will from
the public space.

The proponents of Islam in government, such as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and their Justice and Development
Party, have been remarkably successful. They have exploited the fact that
you can use democratic means to erode democracy, employing a powerful
strategy.

Three pillars of that strategy are worth discussion.

The first is Dawa, a tactic inspired by Islam’s founder, Muhammad. Dawa
means to preach Islam as a way of life, including a way of government,
perpetually and with conviction. Every convert is obligated to preach Islam
to others, creating a grass-roots movement.

The secularists in Turkey underestimated this pillar and thus neglected
competing with the Islamists for the hearts and minds of the electorate.
Polls suggest that 70% of voters might still elect Gul president if Erdogan
succeeds in changing the constitution so that the president can be elected
directly. Any protest from the secularists against this evident popular will
sounds irrational and undemocratic.

The second pillar is the improvement of the economy. No one can deny that
when the secular parties were in power, the Turkish economy was in tatters.
Since Erdogan took office, growth has been strong, with inflation down and
foreign investment high.

The third pillar is taking control of two types of institutions in a
democracy: those designed to educate civilians (education and media) and
those designed to keep law and order (police, justice and the secret
service).

After an initial attempt at Islamic revolution failed in 1997, when the
military engineered a "soft coup" against elected Islamists, Erdogan and his
party understood that gradualism would yield more lasting power. They surely
realize that Islamizing Turkey entirely is possible only if they gain
control of the army and the Constitutional Court, the two institutions that
have helped preserve Turkey’s secular state.

The recent Constitutional Court ruling annulling the nomination of Gul for
the presidency, after the military warned that it is the guardian of
secularism, is only a temporary setback for the Islamists. Erdogan and Gul
have another trick up their sleeves.

If they show the same restraint and patience that have brought them this
far, they may achieve their aim by continuing to court membership in the
European Union. Well-meaning but naive European leaders were manipulated by
the ruling Islamists into saying that Turkey’s army should be placed under
civil control, like all armies in EU member states.

In hindsight, Turkey’s secular liberals have only themselves to blame. They
underestimated the power of Dawa, they failed at growing the economy and
they have not realized that members of the EU have been manipulated.

An important trait of liberalism, however, is the opportunity to learn by
trial and error. Turkish secular liberals must start their own grass-roots
movement, one with the message of individual freedom. They must restore the
confidence of the electorate in entrusting Turkey’s economy to them, and
they must reconquer the institutions of education, information, police and
justice.

They must also make EU leaders understand and respect the fact that the army
and the Constitutional Court – besides defending the country and the
constitution – are also, and maybe even more important, designed to protect
Turkish democracy from Islam.

Bringing back true secularism does not mean just any secularism. It means
secularism that protects individual freedoms and rights, not the
ultra-nationalist kind that breeds an environment in which Adolf Hitler’s
"Mein Kampf" is a bestseller, the Armenian genocide is denied and minorities
are persecuted. Hrant Dink, the Armenian editor, was murdered by such a
nationalist.

It is this mix of virulent nationalism and predatory Islam in Turkey that
makes the challenge for Turkish secular liberals greater than for any other
liberal movement today.

Source:
09,0,4766893.story?coll=la-opinion-center

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ali9may

Georgia Boosts Iraq Deployment

A1+

Georgia Boosts Iraq Deployment
[09:21 pm] 05 May, 2007

Georgia Boosts Iraq Deployment President hopes extra deployment will
help secure NATO membership. While other nations are looking to pull
out of the world’s most dangerous country, Georgia, which already has
850 peacekeepers in Iraq, plans to more than double its contingent
there.

Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili announced the plans in early
March, although it is now reported he had made the decision last July
at a meeting with President George Bush in the White House.

`We want to show to the world that Georgians never run from anything,’
he said. `Even in the most difficult situation, we will maintain our
presence. Moreover, we will increase our presence in Iraq in the
coming year, which is going to be as crucial period for operations.’

Deputy chief of the Georgian general staff Vladimir Chachibaia said
the Georgian brigade would be deployed in the northern Iraqi town of
Al-Kut.

`The Georgians will have their own area of activity,’ he said. `Units
from around nine countries will be subordinate to them. A total of
2,000 troops will study the territory, carrying out the same tasks as
those entrusted to other countries.’

For the last two years, American instructors have been training
Georgian recruits to face the challenges of the Iraq war-zone.

On April 20, a graduation ceremony was held at the Krtsanisi training
centre outside Tbilisi for soldiers completing the programme called
Sustaining Stability, which is estimated to have cost 55 million US
dollars.

A brigade will be selected from these graduates to go to Al-Kut in the
summer. Craig Jones, who supervised the drilling, praised the Georgian
troops.

`The 10 months we’ve been here, working with Georgian soldiers was a
real pleasure,’ he said. `Your soldiers are disciplined, diligent and
learn things quickly. They’ve acquired the experience they are going
to need to succeed in Iraq.’

Being prepared to go to Iraq with a peacekeeping mission was an
obligatory condition for all Georgian recruits, who joined the
American programme and signed a three-year contract with the Georgian
state.

Corporal Mamuka Bandzeladze, who lives in Sachkhere, was one of those
who signed up four months ago.

`My family has reconciled itself to my decision,’ he said. `There was
no other way. Besides, no one says this is going to be
dangerous. They’ve got used to the idea. They know I will go anyway
and will give me their blessing. It’s a pity I’m going to establish
peace in Iraq and not Abkhazia. But an order cannot be countered, and
a soldier must carry it out in any situation.’

Georgia has contributed to the coalition forces in Iraq since August
2003. Its original contingent consisted of 79 troops. Nowadays, a
country with a population of only five million people is the fourth
largest contributor of troops to Iraq after the US, Great Britain and
South Korea.

Shalva Pichkhadze, who heads the organisation Georgia in NATO, said
that by increasing its presence in Iraq, President Saakashvili wanted
to prove its loyalty to Washington, which is the main lobbyist for
Georgia’s ambitions to become a member of NATO.

`We are showing them that if we are admitted to NATO, they will have a
really faithful ally,’ he said. `We say, `We will be your ally and
will do whatever we can for you, and you, in your turn, help us join
NATO.’ Maybe, in this way we can compensate for what we are failing
to do inside the country.’

Georgia is already reaping rewards in Washington. A month ago, the US
Congress passed a bill providing Georgia with 10 million dollars to
speed up its NATO accession.

`We are going to make a very significant contribution both in Iraq and
Afghanistan,’ said one of the leaders of the Georgian parliament’s
pro-governmental majority Giga Bokeria. `First of all, because it
meets the interests of our allies, and secondly because it meets the
interests of all of civilised humanity. Georgia always takes the side
of civilization, especially at a time when it stands opposed to
barbarism.’

However, some Georgian experts believe the fight against `barbarism’
is fraught with risks.

`Despite the fact the Georgian contingent has not lost a single
soldier in the four years it’s been deployed in Iraq, the increase of
the Georgian presence will cause the risk to grow too,’ said military
expert Irakly Aladashvili.

`The Georgian contingent will move from the town of Bakub and the
Baghdad Green Zone to the town of Al Kut, which is part of the
so-called `Red Zone’,’ he said. `This will make the Georgian soldiers’
mission much more dangerous. In addition, once it’s increased, the
contingent will become a more obvious target for terrorists.’

Georgian officer Giorgy Shengelia, who was in command of a Georgian
battalion stationed in Iraq two years ago, and works now in an
American security firm there, told IWPR in a telephone interview to
IWPR that the situation in Iraq has deteriorated from several years
ago.

`I think that today the situation is more difficult than in 2005,’ he
said. `But we all understand that this is necessary for us to be
admitted to NATO and to gain military experience that the Georgian
soldiers will be able to apply at other times as well.’

Opposition members in the Georgian parliament have criticised more the
details of the new deployment than the presence of the contingent
itself.

Parliament is currently debating a proposed boost of the military
budget by 400 million laris (240 million dollars) to almost one
billion laris to cover the extra deployment – making military spending
one quarter of the entire government budget.

Bezhan Gunava of the opposition party Democratic Front told IWPR, `I
have a lot of questions to ask the government. For instance, why is
the contingent being increased to 2,000 troops and what’s the reason
for moving the Georgian division from the Green Zone to the more
dangerous red one?’

The opposition Conservative Party and New Rights Party both support
the deployment of Georgian troops in Iraq, but not in such large
numbers.

Mamuka Katsitadze of the New Rights party called the decision
`political coquetry’ by Saakashvili.

`I think that our young, newly formed and still not very battle-worthy
army should not be used as cannon fodder and have its blood spilled
somewhere on the border with Iran,’ said Kakha Kukava of the
Conservative Party. `We have enough of our own problems.’

Ordinary people appear to share this view. In a brief survey on
Tbilisi’s streets, most respondents said the government had ignored
public opinion in its decision.

`This is very dangerous,’ said Nino, 28. `A close friend of mine went
there, and I’m very afraid for him. I don’t want anyone to go there.’

`Georgian young men should not go there and expose themselves to
danger just for the sake of earning some money,’ said a pensioner
named Otari, who lives in Tbilisi. `It would be better if they took
care of their own homeland. The risk is great, and our boys may be
killed if something bad happens. The chances of their coming back safe
and sound are small.’

By Koba Kiklikadze in Tbilisi Koba Liklikadze is a military
commentator with Radio Liberty in Tbilisi.

Institute for War and Peace Reporting

www.iwpr.net

Genocide Deniers Heckle U.S. Writer On Armenia

GENOCIDE DENIERS HECKLE U.S. WRITER ON ARMENIA
by James Barron – The New York Times Media Group

The International Herald Tribune, France
May 4, 2007 Friday

Maureen Seaberg contributed reporting.

*

As a first-time author, Margaret Ajemian Ahnert hoped that her
appearance at a Barnes & Noble store here would draw attention to
her new book, "The Knock at the Door," which deals with the Armenian
genocide.

Her reading and question-and-answer session Tuesday drew attention,
to be sure, but not the kind she expected.

A man in the audience was arrested after he and several other people
disrupted the reading by shouting and passing out leaflets denying
that the genocide occurred. Ahnert’s 209-page book tells, among other
things, how her mother survived the genocide as a teenager during
World War I and eventually came to the United States.

Ahnert said Wednesday that she did not mean "The Knock at the Door"
to be a political narrative.

"Here I was trying to tell the story of my mother, not making a
political statement," she said. "It’s a mother-daughter story, it’s
how it affected my life. It’s not just about the Armenian genocide,
it’s about my mother growing up, my life, and events in her life
that affected me. It’s a mother-daughter memoir. I’m not making any
historical statements."

Many historians say that the Ottoman Empire was responsible for the
death of more than one million people around 1915 in a campaign
intended to eliminate the Armenian population throughout what is
now Turkey.

Ahnert said the disruption came as she answered a question from the
crowd. Some of those who attended her talk were friends, including
a former governor, Hugh Carey, and the Manhattan district attorney,
Robert Morgenthau, whose grandfather, Henry Morgenthau, was ambassador
to the Ottoman Empire from 1913 to 1916.

"Someone in the middle of the back of the room stood up and said,
‘That’s not so,’ " Ahnert said. "Five or six men started to pass
out fliers of denial. I thought, oh, my goodness sakes, it’s like
Holocaust deniers. I was completely taken aback."

Mary Occhino, who was in the audience, said some of the people were
shouting, "This is a lie, this is a lie, this never happened."

"I got up and said, ‘Enough,’ " said Occhino, the host of a call-in
program on Sirius satellite radio. "Her mother lived through the
genocide – that’s all she said. They said, ‘That’s a lie, that’s
a lie, that never happened.’ But this story is not about genocide;
it’s about a mother’s love for her daughter."

The man who was arrested, identified by the police as Erdem Sahin,
41, of Staten Island, was charged with resisting arrest, a misdemeanor
punishable by up to a year in jail, and faced lesser charges including
disorderly conduct.

At a hearing Wednesday in Manhattan Criminal Court, Judge Rita Mella
adjourned the charges in contemplation of dismissal. That means that
the case will be dropped in six months if Sahin is not arrested again.

Sahin said afterward that he and the other protesters were angry that
France had "made it illegal to say there was no genocide." The French
National Assembly approved the legislation last fall.

"We realize that if we don’t do something, we will soon have no
rights," he said. "We are fighting for freedom of speech."

When asked about his views on the Armenian genocide, he said,
"Honestly, I’m not a historian, but historians say there is no
genocide."

The subject is largely taboo in Turkey, and in recent years, Turkish
writers who have referred to genocide have faced reprisal. A legal
claim against the novelist Elif Shafak was dropped last fall,
but she cut short a six-city U.S. tour promoting her sixth novel,
"The Bastard of Istanbul," which includes Armenian characters.

Orhan Pamuk, who won the 2006 Nobel Prize in Literature, was also sued
by a nationalist group for referring to genocide in a Swiss interview,
and in January, Hrant Dink, a newspaper editor who had challenged the
official Turkish version of the genocide, was fatally shot as he left
his office in Istanbul.

A spokeswoman for the Barnes & Noble chain said that it was unusual
for a reading to be disrupted. Passing out pamphlets violated the
company’s no-solicitation policy, she said, adding: "They were asked
to stop passing out leaflets. They refused. They were jeering the
author. They were asked to sit down and they refused." That was when
the police were called, she said.

Ahnert said she had appeared on college campuses and at a literary
festival in Florida without any problems. "This is something I hope
I don’t have to look forward to," she said.

Armenian Foreign Ministry Confirms Information On Detention Of Six C

ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY CONFIRMS INFORMATION ON DETENTION OF SIX CITIZENS OF ARMENIA BY GEORGIAN FRONTIER GUARDS

Arminfo
2007-05-04 14:45:00

Armenian Embassy in Georgia contacted the foreign relations department
of the Georgian frontier service that confirmed that six citizens
of Armenia are detained, Acting Press Secretary of Armenian Foreign
Minister Vladimir Karapetyan told ArmInfo.

V. Karapetyan said that four of the detainees (Arkady Hambaryan,
Hasmik Barseghyan, Albert Banaryan and Sevada Lalayan) are accused
of illegal crossing of the Armenian-Georgian boundary (not through
Sadakhlo checkpoint, but through mountains). Two citizens of Georgia
were detained together with them (Maria Totikashvili and Lasha
Tumanishvili). Another two citizens of Armenia, Valiko Grigoryan and
Alvard Aslikyan, were detained at Sadakhlo checkpoint later.

They are accused of illegal crossing of the Ossetic
boundary. Investigation is in process. The trial is expected shortly,
V. Karapetyan said. It is not for the first time that Armenian citizens
are detained in Georgia with similar accusations. As practice shows,
judges at first make a decision to let out on bail of 1,500-3,000
laries (880-1,700 USD). Afterwards, approximately in a month, the
court imposes a fine. The fine is equal to the bail amount. To recap,
recently several citizens of Georgia were also accused with illegal
crossing of the Armenian- Georgian boundary. However, the Armenian
party displayed a good will and released them.

Graduates Of Non-State Universities Do Not Want To Get Diplomas

GRADUATES OF NON-STATE UNIVERSITIES DO NOT WANT TO GET DIPLOMAS

KarabakhOpen
04-05-2007 15:17:43

Besides Artsakh State University there are 3 accredited and 4 non-state
universities in Karabakh.

For the second year now, the NKR Ministry of Education, Culture and
Sport holds exams for the graduates of private universities to get
a state diploma.

According to a senior official of the ministry Lousine Karakhanyan,
last year 140 graduates took the exam for state diploma, 66
passed. This year there are only 6 applications. The deadline of
application is May 5.

"I think the population is not aware of what a state diploma means.

Therefore, the applicants are few. We work with rectors of the private
universities, there are announcements on TV and in the Azat Artsakh,"
Lousine Karakhanyan says.

Center For European Law And Integration Opens In YSU

CENTER FOR EUROPEAN LAW AND INTEGRATION OPENS IN YSU

Noyan Tapan
May 04 2007

YEREVAN, MAY 4, NOYAN TAPAN. The Center for European Law and
Integration opened at the Yerevan State University on May 3. RA Prime
Minister Serge Sargsian, NA Speaker Tigran Torosian, head of the
European Commission delegation to Armenia Per Eklund, ambassadors,
ministers were present at the opening.

This center founded with the assistance and financing of the European
Union, for foundation of which 1 mln evros were allocated, is
engaged at present in issues of the public awareness about the EU and
cooperates with the Law Faculty of the higher educational institution.

A periodical dedicated to problems of the EU law, EU integration
and EU-Armenia relations as well as a booklet dedicated to EU
legal, economic and political problems will be published soon on
the initiative of the center. At the same time, the center holds
stazhers’ program which has a goal to involve students of the Law,
International Relations, Economy and Roman-German Faculties in study
of different issues relating to the European Union and Europe.

Besides, the center initiates to have a resource center with a library
of book fund of 2000 titles.

Armenia: Opinion Polls A Fresh Field For Political Battle

ARMENIA: OPINION POLLS A FRESH FIELD FOR POLITICAL BATTLE
Gayane Abrahamyan

EurasiaNet, NY
May 4 2007

Opinion polls are showing that the governing Republican Party of
Armenia and the pro-government Prosperous Armenia Party should command
a comfortable majority of votes in Armenia’s parliamentary elections
on May 12. Some opposition parties, however, claim the findings are
fraudulent — the product of partisan politics.

There is one area — the popular mood — where there is little
argument among members of the political elite. The recent polling data
indicates that discontent over the status quo is widely prevalent. A
March 16-25 survey of 1,200 residents run by Baltic Surveys Ltd./The
Gallup Organization and the Armenian Sociological Association for
the International Republican Institute reported that 50 percent of
respondents believe the country is on the wrong tack, and 59 percent
said that they have no hope for a fair election.

A January survey run by the APR Group indicated still higher
discontent: 94.3 percent of 663 respondents surveyed believe Armenia
needs "radical" socio-economic changes, while a whopping 83 percent
stated that they do not trust government authority.

Under recent constitutional amendments, the parliament elected on May
12 will be more powerful than in the past and, in theory, is expected
by some observers to take a more active role in shaping domestic and
foreign policies.

Aharon Adibekian, head of the Sociometer polling center, compares the
struggle to a wrestling tournament, with parties divided into weight
categories. A survey of 3,000 respondents run by Sociometer in 60
population centers nationwide indicates that the bulk of votes will
go to parties in what Adibekian terms the "heavyweight category." He
predicts the ruling Republican Party of Armenia will receive a 34
percent share, with 32 percent going to oligarch Gagik Tsarukian’s
pro-government Prosperous Armenia Party. The opposition Country of
Law Party, a middleweight contender, he says, will trail a distant
third at 10-12 percent.

Other opposition parties bring up the rear, headed by the Heritage
Party, (another "middleweight" party), with an estimated 7-8 percent
of the vote, followed by the "lightweight" National Unity Party
and People’s Party of Armenia, leaders of the 2004 protests against
President Robert Kocharian, garnering 7 percent or less.

The pollster predicts that the Armenian Revolutionary Federation,
part of the current government coalition, will receive 8-10 percent
of the vote, while the United Labor Party, a fellow coalition member,
may not even meet the necessary 5 percent of the vote necessary to
take seats in parliament.

Some politicians downplay the survey data, expressing the belief that
some pollsters are working with officials to create an electoral
climate favorable to incumbent authority. "Society is sick and
tired of both lying politicians and corrupt sociologists," Deputy
Parliamentary Speaker Vahan Hovhannisyan, a senior leader of the
Armenian Revolutionary Federation, told journalists on April 7.

Manuk Gasparian, chairman of the strongly oppositional Democratic Way
Party, which Adibekian claims will receive zero percent of the vote,
elaborated on that take: "We’ll see who is zero," Gasparian scoffed.

"Adibekian serves the authorities and purposefully publishes data
to mislead people, [to give them the opportunity] to falsify votes
and say later that [a party’s victory] was [the result of] their
popularity." Gasparian puts his party’s likely results at 8 percent
of total vote, provided that the election is free-and-fair.

Armenian political parties have generally held international polling
organizations in greater esteem than local ones, but this time,
a survey run by British pollster Populus shows roughly comparable
results. A Populus survey of 2,000 individuals, conducted April
3-10, predicted 31 percent of the vote for the Republican Party, 27
percent for Prosperous Armenia, 11 percent for the Country of Law,
8 percent for the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, 7 percent for
the opposition National Unity and 5 percent for the People’s Party
of Tigran Karapetian. The poll had a 1 percent margin of error.

Both Populus and Adibekian reported growing popularity for the
Republican Party of Armenia, which has received a preponderance of
mass media campaign coverage, according to monitors. [For details,
see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Populus Director Andrew Cooper pointed out during an April 20 press
conference that the governing party was well organized and appeared
to have a highly motivated voter base. "The important thing is that
people who are going to support the Republicans are more likely to take
part in the voting than the supporters of other parties," Cooper said.

Adibekian claimed that Prosperous Armenia, often seen as a rival to the
Republican Party, has experienced a nearly 40 percentage point decline
in popularity since November-December 2006. The pollster puts it
down to what he describes as the diminished popularity of the various
charity programs associated with the party’s head, Gagik Tsarukian —
an observation not widely born out by media reports from the field.

Adibekian’s predicted turnout for the upcoming vote is also cause
for controversy: a relatively high 60 percent, by his estimate,
the same number recorded for official turnout during the rowdy
2003 parliamentary elections. By contrast, a poll run in March by
Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization and the Armenian Sociological
Association predicted a 43 percent turnout.

"It’s a big question whether Adibekian’s predictions come true, or if
he just states the authorities’ scenario," commented Aram Karapetian,
chairman of the hard-line oppositional New Times Party.

Adibekian brushes off the criticism. Clients would not pay $10,000 –
$15,000 per survey, he stressed, for fraudulent results.

Editor’s Note: Gayane Abrahamyan is a reporter for the independent
online ArmeniaNow weekly in Yerevan.