Author: Tambiyan Samvel

Iranian space research satellite to be launched
Kayhan, Tehran
27 Dec 04
Text of report entitled: ” Iranian astronomy research satellite to be
launched with the cooperation of Russia and Belgium” by Iranian
newspaper Kayhan on 27 December
Iran’s astronomy research satellite will be launched with the
cooperation of Russia and Belgium.
Announcing this, Professor Ali Ajab Shirzadeh head of Maragheh
Astronomy Centre said: At present, 22 joint international projects are
being carried out with the participation of Russia, Belgium and
Austria at this centre.
He added: So far, nine joint science and research projects in the
field of astrophysics have been completed with the cooperation of
France, Turkey, Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Austria and the
scientific articles have been published in the world’s credible
science magazines.

World Armenian Congress leader issues New Year address
ITAR-TASS News Agency
December 22, 2004 Wednesday 5:07 AM Eastern Time
MOSCOW, December 22 — Ara Abramyan, President of the World Armenian
Congress, has congratulated members of the Armenian Diaspora on the
New Year and Christmas.
In 2005 “we shall observe a grim anniversary – 90 years since the
beginning of all-out physical extermination of Armenians in Ottoman
Turkey, which claimed the lives of 1.5 million men, women and
children. The memory of the guiltless people, who died that time,
urges all Armenians throughout the world to pool efforts even more
closely in the interests of resolving the problems, which are of vital
importance for our nation: to make Turkey admit that it has committed
an especially grave crime, and to protect the interests and security
of Armenia, our historic motherland,” says the congratulatory address
issued by him.
“Spiurk (the Armenian term for “Diaspora”) is an inseparable part of
the Armenian nation. No matter where Armenians live, their thoughts
and aspirations are always with their historic motherland. Armenians
are deeply grateful to the countries, which gave shelter to them and
became their new homeland,” the document said.
“They do their best for promoting the prosperity of those countries
and continue to be their law-abiding citizens. At the same time, they
are culturally and spiritually bound with Armenia, which they regard
as a guarantor of the liquidation of consequences of the genocide,
of a just political settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem and
of the preservation of the national identity of Armenians, of their
language, culture and traditions,” the document continued.
“Diversity along with the unity of thoughts and aspiration – this is
our motto. We regard it as a guarantee of our future accomplishments,”
Ara Abramyan stressed in conclusion.

ARMENIAN CULTURAL DAYS HELD IN SHARJAH ON DECEMBER 11-16
YEREVAN, December 21 (Noyan Tapan). The Armenian cultural days were
held in Sharjah on December 11-16. The string orchestra after Komitas,
the “Shoghakn” ethnographic group and the ensemble of dudukists of
prominent artist Gevorg Dabaghian performed within the framework
of the cultural days. The cultural days completed with the “Game”
performance of Mnjakhagh theater. RA Minister of Culture and Youth
Affairs Hovik Hoveyan said during the December 21 press conference that
the official opening of the cultural days was held at the Arts’ Museum
of Sharjah with the exhibition of the works of Haroutiun Boyajian and
Karo Yeghiazarian, then the presentation of the book “Pages from the
History of Armenian-Arab Cultural Relations” published in Arab was
held at the conference hall of the Expo Center of Sharjah. Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Armenia to the United Arab
Emirates Arshak Poladian is the author of the book. The Ambassador also
spoke about the Armenian-Arab relations – from the Middles Ages to our
times. H. Hoveyan mentioned that the practical program on cooperation
for the upcoming two years was signed between the two countries as a
result of the visit. The purpose of the document is to develop and
strengthen cultural cooperation between the two countries, which,
according to the Minister, will contribute to the deepening of the
friendly relations. According to the program, it is expected that
the Arab cultural days will be organized in Armenia in 2005, and the
exhibitions of book and other printed products will be organized in
Sharjah. The Minister also said that the Armenian art critics visited
the newly constructed church of Gregory the Illuminator in Sharjah,
met with the Armenian Community of the United Arab Emirates, the head
of the council of elders, Head of the Diocese Ter Aram Deirmejian, and
200 books published in Armenia were given to the Ohannesian Gymnasia.

Karabakh leader accuses Azerbaijan of ignoring reality
Mediamax news agency
16 Dec 04
Yerevan, 16 December: The efforts of the political administration of
the Nagornyy Karabakh republic (NKR) are still aimed at reaching a
“lasting peaceful solution to the conflict with Azerbaijan on the
basis of the principles fully reflecting the will of the NKR people”,
a Mediamax special correspondent quoted the president of the NKR,
Arkadiy Gukasyan, as telling a meeting of representatives of all
branches of power of the republic in Stepanakert today.
The NKR president expressed his regret that “at the current stage in
the peace process, which runs under the auspices of the OSCE Minsk
Group, attempts are being made to artificially isolate the Karabakh
side”. At the same time, he expressed his confidence that “this very
circumstance impedes a new impetus to the negotiating process that
can develop the positive results achieved over the past more than
10 years thanks to the effort of the parties to the conflict and
international mediation”.
“The counter-productive position of the Baku authorities, which
are reluctant to reckon not only with the existing realities but
also with the interests of the world and regional states, including
Azerbaijan’s own allies, has actually brought the negotiating process
to an impasse the way out of which cannot be found without the equal
involvement of Nagornyy Karabakh in the negotiations,” Gukasyan said.
He said if the Azerbaijani authorities had the good will and a
genuine interest in resolving the conflict on the basis of reasonable
compromises, the way out of the crisis would be found and the efforts
of the Minsk Group co-chairmen would produce the desired positive
results.
Gukasyan confirmed the readiness of the Nagornyy Karabakh republic for
a direct dialogue with Baku and for the joint discussion of all issues
concerning the prospects for relations between Nagornyy Karabakh and
Azerbaijan, Mediamax reports.
“However, the Baku authorities do not seem to have given up their
crazy and suicidal intentions to resolve the problem by force, which
compels us to continue taking the necessary measures to strengthen
the defence capability of the NKR and raise the combat readiness of
our army, which is the most reliable guarantor of the security of
our state and the people of Nagornyy Karabakh,” Arkadiy Gukasyan said.

TURKEY DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO EU STANDARDS – ARMENIAN YOUTHS UNDERLINE IN
THEIR LETTER TO AMBASSADORS OF EU STATES
YEREVAN, December 16 (Noyan Tapan). Turkey was not and cannot be
a state-bearer of the European legacy in the political and cultural
sense or in terms of civilization. The ARF “Nicol Aghbalian” students
union and the “Mitk-Kentron” youth analytic organization state this in
a letter sent to the EU states’ ambassadors accredited in Armenia. In
the letter they express conviction that Turkey does not correspond
to the human rights and political freedoms standards of the EU.
“Denying the fact that the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic
committed the Armenian genocide in 1915-1923, Turkey today
perpetrates destruction of the Armenian cultural legacy. Since
Armenia’s independence Turkey has been implementing an extremely
hostile policy with respect to Armenia by violating repeatedly the
fundamental principles of the international law,” the authors of the
letter emphasize.
The Armenian youths are concerned about the scandalous facts of the
human rights violation in Turkey, by restriction of freedom of speech
and by intolerance of etnic minorities whose rights are stipulated
by the constitution.
“In the Armenian society and among the Armenian youth the European
Union is perceived as an institution that supports the high criteria
of human rights and fundamental freedoms defence, while the start
of negotiations on Turkey’s membership in the EU with Ankara raises
doubts about this image of the European Union,” the authors of the
letter underline.
Noting that Armenia considers the European orientation to be one of the
priorities on its political supremacies agenda, the Armenian youths
express hope that the EU leaders will not yield to an inoportune
and momentary interest, to Ankara’s “insincere and vain reforms”
and will take a correct decision refusing to negotiate with Turkey on
the issue of its joining the EU until Ankara in particular recognizes
the 1915-1923 Armenian genocide. “By agrreeing silently to Turkey’s
membership, the member states assume responsibility for this heinous
crime against humanity,” the letter reads.

ArmenPress
Dec 16 2004
AGARAK PLANT TO PRODUCE 7 TONS OF MOLYBDENUM AND 6,000 TONS OF COPPER
CONCENTRATE IN 2005
AGARAK, DECEMBER 16, ARMENPRESS: The copper and molybdenum plant
in the southern Armenian Agarak, near the border with Iran, plans to
produce next year 7 tons of molybdenum and 6,000 tons of copper
concentrate.
The plan’s 100 percent shares were privatized last April by a
US-based Comsup Industries Ltd, which says it has already invested in
its modernization around $3 million out of $3.5 million it pledged
when taking it over.
According to plant’s chief manager Mayis Khachatrian, the money
was used to purchase new equipment and modernize its facilities.
Privatization of Agarak plant was followed by a 20 percent rise of
workers’ wages, which makes now about $150 a month. The plant’s
management has also donated 21 million drams to Agarak and 6 million
to the nearby Meghri to help their municipalities to solve part of
their most pressing problems.

OSCE “REFORM” — OR A NEW LEASE ON LIFE?
Documents of the OSCE’s 2004 year-end ministerial conference, Vienna and Sofia,
December 1-8; Interfax, RIA-Novosti, December 9-12
By Vladimir Socor
With two weeks remaining from the OSCE’s 2004 budgetary authorization,
Moscow threatens to block adoption of the 2005 budget unless the
organization introduces Russian-proposed “reforms.” Those proposals
seek to: boost the OSCE’s role in the military-political and security
sphere, where Russia can and does manipulate the organization;
emasculate the OSCE in the democracy sphere, where the organization
can and does operate independently of Russia; and curtail overall
Western influence in the OSCE by restricting extra-budgetary funding
of the organization.
Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov, Deputy Minister
Vladimir Chizhov, and other officials pushed those proposals forcefully
at the OSCE’s year-end conference in Sofia on December 6-7, and
continue to do so afterwards. Moscow argues that OSCE activities are
doubly imbalanced: functionally, by focusing selectively on democracy
issues while neglecting all-European military-security issues; and
geographically, by focusing on political developments in post-Soviet
countries while ignoring what Moscow describes as flawed elections
and human-rights violations in Western countries and their new allies.
The “reform” proposals target three OSCE institutions and processes:
the Warsaw-based Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
(ODIHR), which specializes in monitoring elections throughout the OSCE
area; the organization’s field missions; and its budget-formation
procedures. Russian officials continually refer to reform proposals
advanced by the presidents of eight CIS countries in their July 3 and
September 15 collective statements to the OSCE. At the Sofia year-end
meeting, however, only Belarus acted as a convinced supporter of
those reform proposals.
The joint Russia-Belarus proposal calls for tasking ODIHR to: take into
account the work done in the CIS on developing election standards; use
those standards, alongside Western ones, in working out a “common,
uniform set of criteria” for OSCE-CIS appraisals of elections;
increase the proportion of CIS countries’ representatives in ODIHR
election observation missions; finance election observation through
the OSCE’s unified budget only [i.e., disallowing Western countries’
contributions; these do not require Russian approval, whereas the
unified budget does].
Russia and Belarus gave the OSCE until June 30, 2005, to introduce
these changes, and the organization’s Permanent Council to adopt
new political guidelines for OSCE/ODIHR election monitoring in line
with those changes. In a similar vein, the statement by CIS Executive
Committee Chairman and Executive Secretary Vladimir Rushailo called for
“coordination” of OSCE/ODIHR and CIS election observation missions,
with a view to issuing “joint assessments” of elections. As is often
the case, Russia spoke on the collective behalf of the CIS without
reflecting a consensus among those 12 countries. In the end-game
negotiations on the draft final declaration, Armenia proposed inserting
a positive reference to developing a common OSCE-CIS set of election
standards. Armenia had similarly lined up behind Russia and Belarus
in accepting the fraudulent election of Viktor Yanukovych as president
of Ukraine.
Had such “reforms” been in place, OSCE/ODIHR could not have ascertained
the electoral fraud in Ukraine, would have joined the Rushailo-led CIS
monitoring mission in blessing the fraudulent returns, and would have
been prevented from deciding — as it did at Sofia — to send and fund
observers to the repeat runoff in Ukraine. To “reform” the OSCE’s field
missions, Russia proposes to: restrict the missions’ extra-budgetary
funding, which mostly consists of above-board contributions by
Western countries to local pro-democracy activities; confine the
scope of missions’ activities to socioeconomic projects requested by
host countries’ authorities; limit the missions’ mandate to one-year
renewable terms, subject to the host government’s agreement each time;
and increase the proportion of representatives of certain CIS member
countries in OSCE field missions. The organization’s German-led Minsk
Office was “reformed” already in 2003 along these lines.
The proposed budgetary “reform” would entail: revising the scales of
OSCE member countries’ contributions “according to their ability to
pay” [i.e., reducing CIS countries’ contributions]; ending or curbing
the practice of extra-budgetary funding of the OSCE in general
[thus cutting the organization’s overall financial resources];
and establishing budget formation procedures that would, in their
practical effect, severely restrict the OSCE’s ability to function
without Russia’s or its supporters’ approval.
Russia gave the OSCE until December 31 to commit itself to proceeding
down this road. “In the absence of firm obligations on this score, we
cannot vote the 2005 budget,” Lavrov and Chizhov both warned. Their
statements and those of other Russian officials before, during, and
after the Sofia meeting strongly suggested that Russia can either
keep the OSCE in business or push it toward demise (“throw it on the
sidelines of history,” in Lavrov’s unreferenced paraphrase of Trotsky),
depending on the extent to which it cooperates with Russian policies.
Such warnings exploit the OSCE’s structural vulnerabilities, fear
of demise through irrelevance, awareness of its rapidly diminishing
raisons d’etre — save election-monitoring, which Moscow now wants to
rein in — and its disposition to give in to Russia year after year in
the military-security sphere as a price of remaining a player in that
sphere. Anxious about institutional survival, and damaged by Russia
perhaps irreparably at the 2002 Porto and 2003 Maastricht year-end
meetings over a wide range of security and democracy issues, the OSCE
hides its weaknesses and failures from public view. It prefers to
paper over the problems, instead of debating them openly and exposing
Russia’s tactics.
At the Sofia meeting, Secretary of State Colin Powell stated that the
United States “categorically disagreed” with Russian proposals to shift
OSCE’s focus away from democracy building in post-Soviet countries. The
European Union spoke out in a similar vein. Dutch Minister of
Foreign Affairs Bernard Bot, speaking for the EU’s presidency on
behalf of all member countries, as well as the External Relations
and European Neighborhood Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner, both
ruled out any reduction of OSCE democracy-building activities, or a
“rebalancing” of security and pro-democracy goals at the expense
of the latter. Whether this stance, taken in the year-end meeting’s
media limelight, can hold in the non-transparent give-and-take with
Russia. The OSCE’s incoming Slovenian Chairmanship for 2005 sounds
anxious. According to that country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, OSCE
Chairman-in-Office-designate Dimitrji Rupel, in his closing statement
at Sofia, “Foremost among these challenges . . . is the fissure in
relations [between] East and West. As a stark reflection of this
regrettable reality . . . the more we talk of no new dividing lines
in Europe, the more we are confronted with them. I therefore read
carefully the Moscow declaration and Astana address of Presidents
of CIS states . . . a resounding expression of dissatisfaction at
the highest level, which has to be taken into account. I intend to
work relentlessly to address this situation.” Pointing to the urgent
need to adopt the 2005 budget before the end of 2004, Rupel stated,
“Without this, the very functioning of the organization would be
in jeopardy . . . . My biggest concern at the moment is to avert a
political stalemate in the organization.”
If that concern is overriding — and Russian tactics are indeed
designed to make it the overriding concern for the OSCE — then the
temptation may well persist to ensure the organization’s survival
through continuing concessions to Russia regarding the “frozen
conflicts,” CFE Treaty and Istanbul Commitment implementation, border
monitoring, and other security issues, as well as using the OSCE to
reopen ethnic issues in Estonia and Latvia at Russian insistence.
That approach would only deepen the OSCE’s crisis.
Russian duress and for the third consecutive year, the OSCE at Sofia
was unable even to cite its own earlier resolutions; let alone call,
if only symbolically, for their implementation. The organization lost
the final vestiges of its credibility in the security sphere at the
Sofia meeting.
That repeat failure, however, points the OSCE’s way out of
crisis. Election monitoring, promotion of good governance, and
democratic institution building in post-Soviet countries are compelling
raisons d’etre for the organization. It is in the democracy sphere
that the OSCE can bring its comparative advantages to bear. This,
not Russian-prescribed “reforms,” can provide the OSCE with a new
lease on life.

Armenian speaker, visiting Russian counterpart discuss joint programmes
Arminfo
15 Dec 04
YEREVAN
Speaker of the Russian State Duma Boris Gryzlov, who is paying an
official visit Armenia, met Speaker of the Armenian National Assembly
Artur Bagdasaryan today.
During the meeting, which was also attended by the chairmen of the
Armenian parliament’s standing commissions, heads of parliamentary
factions and groups, Artur Bagdasaryan and Boris Gryzlov touched on
prospects for the development of interstate relations, the press
service of the Armenian National Assembly has told Arminfo.
Special emphasis was placed on ways of boosting the effectiveness of
the CIS Parliamentary Assembly (PA), cooperation in preparing model
laws for the Commonwealth’s PA, namely in developing a legal framework
to combat terrorism, implement joint programmes in the areas of
science, education and culture, expand regional relations, cooperate
within the framework of international organizations, etc.
The Armenian parliament speaker said Armenia was attaching special
importance to the role of the Russian Federation in settling the
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group. Bagdasaryan pointed to the importance of launching the five
Armenian enterprises handed over to Russia as part of the Property for
Debt agreement, adding that people were waiting for the creation of
jobs and investment opportunities, which is stipulated by the
agreement. The sides also pointed to the importance of resuming the
railway and ferryboat link between the two countries.
In reply, Boris Gryzlov said everything would be done to implement the
Property for Debt agreement, noting that the allocation of financial
resources to that end was envisaged in next year’s Russian state
budget. The State Duma speaker promised that the issue of restoring
the railway and ferryboat link would be tabled as soon as he returned
to Moscow. Gryzlov also shared with his Armenian counterparts the
results of the State Duma’s work this year. He said relations between
Armenia and the Russian Federation were friendly and described Armenia
as Russia’s outpost in the South Caucasus.
It was also said that the next meeting of the Russian-Armenian
intergovernmental commission due in Moscow in late December would
discuss issues raised today.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Tageblatt, Luxemburg
Mercredi 14 Dec. 2004
La communauté arménienne se mobilise contre l’adhésion de la Turquie
à l’UE
Les 350.000 Arméniens de France, la plus importante communauté de la
diaspora européenne, ne veulent pas, dans leur immense majorité,
entendre parler d’une adhésion de la Turquie à l’UE sans
reconnaissance préalable du génocide arménien.
»Nous sommes inquiets, déclare Ara Toranian, président du Conseil de
Coordination des Organisations Arméniennes de France (CCAF), et notre
inquiétude se fonde sur le fait que non seulement la Turquie ne
reconnaît pas le génocide de 1915 mais qu’en plus, elle pratique un
négationisme actif. Ce négationisme, ajoute-t-il, c’est la
continuation du génocide par d’autres moyens».
Les massacres et déportations d’Arméniens sous l’Empire ottoman de
1915 à 1917 ont fait 1,5 million de morts, selon les Arméniens. Le
Parlement français a reconnu officiellement en 2001 qu’il s’agissait
bien d’un génocide.
La diaspora arménienne en France, citée souvent comme un modèle
d’intégration, est la deuxième au monde après celle des Etats-Unis
(900.000 personnes). Elle est constituée pour l’essentiel, remarque
Claire Mouradian, chercheuse au CNRS, de rescapés du génocide et de
leurs descendants.
A la veille du sommet européen de Buxelles qui doit décider d’engager
ou non des négociations d’adhésion de la Turquie à l’UE, la
communauté arménienne de France se mobilise et organise une grande
manifestation le 17 décembre à Bruxelles. Le Comité de défense de la
cause arménienne (CDCA) a ainsi affrété un train à partir de la
région de Marseille où vivent quelque 80.000 Arméniens. Au moins
quinze autobus et de nombreuses voitures partiront par ailleurs de la
région parisienne avec ce leitmotiv: »Non à l’entrée dans l’UE d’une
Turquie négationiste!»
L’unanimisme dans l’exigence de la reconnaissance du génocide par la
Turquie est bien réel, confirme Jean-Claude Kebabdjian, président du
Centre de recherches sur la diaspora arménienne, qui reconnaît
appartenir à une minorité souhaitant privilégier le dialogue avec la
Turquie. »La reconnaissance du génocide, a-t-il déclaré à l’AFP, est
un préalable souhaitable mais, en même temps, il faut travailler sur
le long terme. On n’aura pas de résultats miraculeux si on leur met
le couteau sous la gorge».
Mais, dit-il, le peuple turc ne peut rien construire »avec le cadavre
d’un peuple dans sa cave».
En juin 1987, le Parlement européen avait adopté une résolution
faisant de la reconnaissance du génocide arménien une des conditions
de l’entrée de la Turquie en Europe. En revanche, cette exigence n’a
pas été retenue dans les critères de Copenhague qui fixent les
conditions d’ouverture de négociations avec la Turquie.
Le ministre des Affaires étrangères Michel Barnier a souligné mardi
que la France »posera toutes les questions, notamment celle du
génocide arménien (…), au long de cette négociation». »Je pense que
le moment venu, la Turquie devra faire ce travail de mémoire», a-t-il
ajouté.
M. Kebabdjian, qui estime que le ministre français a posé là »une
clause morale de salubrité publique», affirme également qu’»il faut
laisser aux Turcs le temps de digérer leur histoire». »Les Arméniens
développent une pathologie de victimes, les Turcs une pathologie de
bourreaux. Il faudra bien guérir un jour ensemble», lance-t-il.
»Illusoire», répond Ara Toranian, pour lequel »en 90 ans, les Turcs
ont eu tout le temps de digérer».

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Dec 14 2004
`One More Condition’ (!) from the French Turkish-Skeptics: “Accept
Armenian Kill
“If Turkey can enter the EU, Turkish economy and democracy will be
stabilized, and Armenia will also benefit from a EU member Turkey.’
Jan Soykok, Journal of Turkish Weekly (JTW)
14 December 2004
France has said it will ask Turkey to acknowledge the so-called `mass
killing of Armenians’ which claimed happened during the Ottoman years
(almost a century ago) as a `tragedy’ when it begins EU accession
talks. Turkish politicians and academics cannot understand the
connection between the EU.
Armenians say 1.5 million of their people died or were deported from
their homelands under the Ottoman rule, while the Turkish side argues
the whole Armenian population at that time was less than 1.5 million.
According to Turkish historians it was the war years and the
Armenians rioted in the Empire’s Eastern territories. Turkish
political scientist Dr. Nilgun Gulcan says `Most of the killings were
result of the tribal conflicts between Armenians and Kurdish groups.
Many Armenians died due to the bad weather and war circumstances.
Many died for instance as a result of epidemic diseases and starving.
Not only Armenians died. Many Muslims were also killed or died. More
than 500.000 Muslims were killed by the armed Armenian gangs. Now the
radical Armenians just accuse Turks for the tribal conflicts and
riots. They must question their past, apart from the Ottoman
history.’
Mr. Barnier said France did not consider Turkish acknowledgement a
condition of EU entry, but insisted his country would raise the issue
once talks opened. Speaking to reporters after a meeting of EU
foreign ministers to discuss plans to invite Turkey for accession
talks, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said Turkey had `a duty
to remember’.
Dr. Gulcan said `there was no link between Turkey’s EU negotiations
and the Armenian issue’:
`France believes that accession talks should not begin before the
second half of 2005. French public is under manipulation. The
Armenian lobbying groups and the anti-Turkish groups abuse Turkey’s
EU bid. Turkey’s accession is a dramatic domestic politics issue and
many French politicians make plans for the coming elections. They
`sacrifice’ Turkey’s entry for their personal election interests
added Dr. Nilgun Gulcan.
About 300,000 Armenians live in France, more than in any other
European country, and community leaders have pledged to pressure
French President Jacques Chirac on the `genocide’ issue during
Turkish accession negotiations.
Dr. Sedat Laciner, form ISRO, however, argues Turkey’s entry to the
EU will be useful in solving problems between Turkish and Armenian
peoples:
`The Armenian Diaspora thinks that Turkey’s accession to the EU is
against Armenian interest. This is a false estimation. If Turkey can
enter the EU, Turkish economy and democracy will be stabilized, and
Armenia will also benefit from a EU member Turkey.’