Author: Zaminian Bedik

Sat, Aug. 11, 2007

Editorial | Genocide Tribunal

Justice for Cambodia

Cambodians have been waiting decades for justice to rise from the
killing fields. Finally, that time has come.

The country’s genocide tribunal last week indicted Kaing Guek Eav,
better known as Duch. He is the first top official of the notorious
Khmer Rouge to be detained by the special U.N.-backed war crimes
court.

The slow march to accountability holds many lessons for international
justice.

Duch, 64, ran a notorious prison that doubled as a torture and
execution center. The building is now a memorial to the 14,000 people
who lost their lives there. Only seven inmates survived.

About 1.7 million Cambodians died when the radical communist group
Khmer Rouge ruled, from 1975 to 1979. The Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot,
killed one-fifth of the country’s population in pursuit of a twisted
vision of a peasant utopia.

Intellectuals and professionals were executed. Peasants never got
their utopia, but at least they had a better chance of surviving: Many
among the 150,000 Cambodian refugees in Philadelphia and other
American cities were impoverished farmers.

A credible justice process for the Khmer Rouge’s crimes has been
stalled for many reasons, including a 10-year occupation of Cambodia
by the Vietnamese, who ousted the Khmer Rouge from power, and a
13-year civil war.

Long-time Prime Minister Hun Sen also has resisted an international
tribunal. That could be because he feared an inquiry might provide
damning details of links between members of his government and the
Khmer Rouge.

In that fear rests the importance of pursuing justice for all crimes
against humanity.

Such trials, once convictions accumulate around the world, hold
promise of having a deterrent effect on heads of state who otherwise
might resort to grotesque human rights abuses to retain their grip on
power and resources.

Dictators thrive on impunity for their actions. They bet that the
international community won’t bother to intervene, especially if they
are in remote corners of the world.

An international justice system that can indict, catch and convict the
purveyors of genocide is part of the calculus for ending that impunity
and changing bad guys’ thinking.

But there will have to be flexibility, even if human rights activists
dream of all such cases going before the International Criminal Court
in the Hague.

Hun Sen wasn’t ever going to give up all control over trying Khmer
Rouge officials. The compromise, five years in the making, is a hybrid
tribunal comprising international and Cambodian jurists. Procedural
rules also had to be worked out with Hun Sen’s government.

The court may not have the full freedom of other tribunals, but it
already is proving its worth by targeting Duch; Pol Pot’s top
lieutenant, Nuon Chea; former Foreign Minister Ieng Sary, and Khieu
Samphan, who was president under the Khmer Rouge.

Their prosecution can come none too soon. Pol Pot and his military
commander, Ta Mok, lived into old age without ever being tried. Other
top leaders, who have been allowed to live freely in Cambodia, are in
their 70s or older.

Rorng Sorn, 39, was a child in Cambodia during Pol Pot’s reign. Two of
her uncles died. She and her sister were separated from their parents
for years.

Now director of programs at the Cambodian Association of Greater
Philadelphia, Sorn says the prosecutions now are a good thing, but she
long ago moved on with her life.

Others have been waiting.

Sorn told of an elderly Cambodian man in Philadelphia whose parents
were killed by the Khmer Rouge. One sister died from illness; another
walked into the woods to look for food and never returned.

The man said holding Khmer Rouge officials accountable honors the
memory of his lost loved ones. It is for them that Duch and others
should face public scrutiny and scorn.

Cambodians deserve to hear accounts of how and why atrocities were
done from the mouths of the remaining Khmer Rouge leaders. They
deserve verdicts based on evidence.

Only then can this bloody chapter in history be closed.

Georgian border guards detained two Georgian citizens and an Armenian
citizen

arminfo
2007-08-11 11:30:00

Georgian border guards detained two citizens of Georgia and a citizen
of Armenia while they were crossing the border, BLACK SEA PRESS was
told at the press service of the Border Police of the Georgian Ministry
of Interior. In particular, the coworkers of Batumi’s Border
Administration of `Sarpi’ checkpoint on the Turkish border detained a
Georgian citizen. The detenu was sought by the Georgian law-enforcement
bodies and was sent to Samtred’s Department of Internal Affairs for
further reaction. The coworkers also detained an Armenian citizen, who
had recently entered Georgia from Adler, escaping passport control.
Criminal proceedings are under way in this respect. Moreover, another
Georgian citizen was detained while passing through passport control at
`Tbilisi-Vienna’ flight at the airport of Tbilisi. The detenu was
sought by the Ministry of Interior. He was passed to the Department of
Counter-espionage of the Georgian Ministry of Interior for further
reaction.

GENOCIDE STANCE CLOUDS FUTURE OF ‘NO PLACE FOR HATE’ PROGRAM
By Jillian Fennimore, Staff Writer

GateHouse News Service
Watertown TAB & Press, MA
Aug 9 2007

Town Council may sever or suspend Watertown’s ties to the "No Place
for Hate" program amid questions about the stance toward the Armenian
Genocide of the program’s co-sponsor, the Anti-Defamation League.

According to Will Twombly, co-chairperson of Watertown’s "No Place
for Hate" committee, all options are on the table, including removing
its services from the town altogether.

Twombly said his committee would be meeting with members of the ADL
soon to ask some "very serious questions."

"We are certainly very disturbed with what we perceive to be the
ADL’s stance on the [Armenian] genocide," he said. "We do feel the
need to take some decisive action. The question is what."

Controversy began last month when the TAB & Press published a
letter that highlighted statements from ADL’s national director,
Abraham Foxman, that Congress should play no role in recognizing the
Armenian Genocide. Some have classified his words as "genocide denial"
regarding what most historians agree was a campaign waged against
ethnic Armenians by the Ottoman government during and after World
War I. As many as 1.5 million Armenians died from 1915 to 1923.

ADL representatives said the group has never denied the Armenian
Genocide.

"ADL has never denied what happened at the close of the First World
War," read a statement from ADL Regional Director Andrew Tarsy and
Regional Board Chairman James Rudolph. "There were massacres of
Armenians and great suffering at the hands of the Ottoman Empire. We
believe today’s Turkish government should do more than it has done
to come to grips with the past and reconcile with Armenians. We have
said that to Turkish officials and we have said it publicly. ADL
continues to believe this is the best way to proceed."

But there are many who are taking a stance against the ADL. A Web
site – – was created by an ad-hoc group of
"Armenian-American activists" around town. The site has a petition for
both "No Place for Hate" and Foxman to recognize the genocide publicly.

The subject ‘strikes the heart of every Armenian’ Sharistan
Melkonian, chairperson of the Armenian National Committee of Eastern
Massachusetts, said Foxman’s statements on the Armenian Genocide are
"disappointing and unconscionable."

"For the national director of the ADL, an organization with a
94-year history of dedication to eradicating anti-Semitism, bigotry
and extremism, to plead ignorance about the Armenian Genocide is
unfathomable," she wrote in an e-mail. "….if ADL is unwilling to
publicly and unequivocally renounce its agenda, the Watertown Town
Council should insist that NPFH sever its ties with ADL in order that
NPFH continue the good work that is mandated without the unworthy
baggage of Foxman’s unfortunate position."

State Rep. Rachel Kaprielian, D-Watertown, said she had a different
opinion on the matter before hearing Foxman’s public statements.

"I was deeply disturbed," she said in response to the recent
controversy. "I am now taking a position that we should divorce
ourselves from [ADL]. [The Armenian Genocide] is a major subject that
strikes the heart of every Armenian in the world. It’s my lifeline
and my heartstrings. This has affected my family."

A spokesman for the ADL, who did not wish to be named, said it is
"regrettable" that "No Place for Hate" has been caught up in the public
uproar. He said that the ADL has been urging the Turkish government
to do more to address its Ottoman past.

"’No Place for Hate’ was a good program a month ago; it’s still a
good program today," he said. "That has not changed. People have only
wanted to listen to part of what our position is."

Town Council poised to sever ties to ADL In 1999, the "No Place for
Hate" program was created by the ADL New England Region, in partnership
with the Massachusetts Municipal Association, to "provide communities
with a solid framework for promoting an inclusive environment while
fighting all forms of hate and bigotry," according to its Web site.

The town welcomed the program more than two years ago, and in 2005,
council members unanimously adopted a proclamation supporting the
committee and its programs for "zero tolerance" toward bigotry.

In May, Town Council renewed its vote display a sign marking
recertification as a "No Place for Hate" community. Fifty communities
in Massachusetts participate in the program.

But the ADL controversy has pushed councilors to second-guess their
support.

At-Large Councilor Marilyn Devaney said she is personally affected
by the ADL’s position, or lack thereof, on the Armenian Genocide.

"I knew survivors, and it’s unbelievable to say that it never
happened," she said. "This is a public embarrassment. I think that
we could adopt ‘No Place for Hate’ on our own. There’s got to be a
better way."

Devaney plans to present a proclamation on Aug. 14 to rescind the
council’s vote to support a "No Place for Hate Committee" under the
ADL, but maintain the program’s policies in the community.

Fellow At-Large Councilor John Donohue said it would be best to pull
the committee aside for the time being.

"There needs to be a review of No Place for Hate in Watertown,"
he said. "I think we should suspend the recognition of it until it
can be properly defined. The idea [of the committee] makes a lot of
sense. The connections and affiliations don’t."

Council President Clyde Younger said he has been "baffled" by the
entire situation.

"We [Town Council] have gone on record as opposing any genocide denial,
and wanting the Turkish government to recognize it," he said.

"We have to just reinforce our previous position on that, as well as
supporting Watertown as being ‘No Place for Hate’."

District A Councilor Jonathan Hecht agreed.

"I think we should be very clear and strong in the community about
demanding that the Armenian Genocide should be recognized," he said.

"The inconsistency [with what the No Place for Hate committee is all
about] is so blatant. This is an opportunity for the community and
the committee to look at this more closely."

At-Large Councilor Steve Corbett said he would hate to have to drop
the program.

"It would be an awful shame to have to back out of this," he said.

"Our program has nothing to do with any position [on the Armenian
Genocide]."

As a councilor who represents the East End of town, Angie Kounelis said
a majority of her constituents are of ethnic background, and said the
concept of a "No Place for Hate" committee is "wonderful" for the town.

The controversy has been worrisome, she said.

"I do not have time to get into national organizations and their
behind-the-scenes agendas," she said. "I’d like to see what the
[No Place for Hate] committee is going to do."

Twombly said the committee has one goal in mind.

"We want to be able to return to serving the people of Watertown free
and clear of any negative associations, any positions with Armenian
genocide," he said. "We want to be able to proceed knowing that the
people in Watertown has confidence in what we are doing."

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES: WHITE HOUSE HAS NOT SHIFTED ITS POSITION ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Yerkir
07.08.2007 17:05

YEREVAN (YERKIR) – The White House administration has not yet
identified its choice for the next nominee as US Ambassador to
Armenia. Richard Hoagland is expected to be nominated for another
post soon, Spokeswoman for the White House Emily Lawrimore said.

"President Bush believes Hoagland would have done a wonderful job,
and thanks him for his willingness to serve his country," she said,
The Los Angeles Times reported, according to PanARMENIAN.Net. But
the US administration has not shifted its position on the Armenian
Genocide issue, the newspaper reports.

The Los Angeles Times says US’s refusal to recognize the Armenian
Genocide is connected with the importance of American-Turkish relations
and Turkey’s support that Washington needs in the Middle East. The
article reminds that 1.2 million Armenians were killed in the last
years of the Ottoman Empire during the World War I, as fact that
modern Turkey refuses to recognize.

The cause of Richard Hoagland’s withdrawal is in New Jersey Senator
Robert Menendez’s persistent refusal to agree on his nomination,
since Hoagland did not recognize the events of 1915 as Armenian
Genocide during his confirmation Senate hearings.

"We are obviously pleased that the administration came to understand
that I had no intention of withdrawing my hold. I hope the new nominee
would be somebody who understands the reality of the Armenian Genocide
and can express himself or herself when the time comes for a nomination
hearing," the congressman underscored.

The Los Angeles Times also reminds that in a recent poll by the Pew
Research Center, only 9% of Turks held a favorable view of the US.

On August 3 the White House withdrew Richard Hoagland’s candidacy as US
Ambassador to Armenia after New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez twice
placed a hold on his nomination, since R. Hoagland did not recognize
events of 1915 as genocide during his confirmation hearings before
the Senate. Former US Ambassador to Armenia John Evans was recalled
in September of 2006 because he had publicly called the events of
1915 genocide.

NEXT MEETING BETWEEN ARMENIAN AND AZERI PRESIDENTS MAY TAKE PLACE IN OCTOBER-NOVEMBER

PanARMENIAN.Net
03.08.2007 15:26 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The next meeting between Armenian and Azeri
presidents in the framework of the Prague negotiation peace process
on the Nagorno Karabakh conflicts may take place in October-November,
OSCE MG American Co-Chair Matthew Bryza stated in Baku.

"To some extent we were disappointed by the results of the
St. Petersburg meeting. But from the other hand after having visited
Baku and Yerevan I see that the process continues," he underlined. The
American diplomat expressed hope that there are positive moves in
the negotiation process. "I hope there are some positive moves in the
process. But I cannot say more yet," Bryza underlined, Day.az reports.

PLAY IN NAGORNO KARABAKH CALLED ‘ELECTIONS’ IS ATTEMPT TO DECORATE ILLEGAL ACTIONS – AZERBAIJANI CENTRAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Trend News Agency, Azerbaijan
Aug 1 2007

Azerbaijan, Baku / Trend corr. I.Alizadeh / Natik Mammadov, the
secretary of the Azerbaijani Central Election Commission (CEC),
expressing his attitude on decision of Nagorno-Karabakh separatists
to hold municipal elections in 14 October, has stated that "plays in
Nagorno-Karabakh, held as ‘elections’ were attempts of Armenians to
decorate their illegal actions".

Mammadov has noted that Nagorno-Karabakh is the integral territory
of the Azerbaijan Republic and any actions on this territory should
be held in compliance with the Azerbaijani legislation. "Actions
contradict to Azerbaijani legislation is illegal, as Azerbaijan has
its own Constitution and Laws. Elections, which are held in this
territory should base on the Azerbaijani Constitution.

Mammadov said Azerbaijan has been trying to settle the problem
by peaceful negotiations. While such actions of Separatists of
Nagorno-Karabakh hider the process, Mammadov added. Mammadov said
that there were not any legal structure able independently define
their own fate and to hold elections.

"Presently, Nagorno-Karabakh is an empty territory. The Azerbaijani
population was moved from the territory by force and their rights were
broken. Such shows are organized to give legal form to the separate
regime. There cannot be set up the President Institute, municipalities,
which do not correspond to the Azerbaijani legislation," Mammadov
noted.

CEC, which holds elections and referendums in Azerbaijan, will express
its attitude to the issue.

WORLD BANK TO PROVIDE 5 MILLION DOLLARS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ARMENIA’S IRRIGATION SYSTEMS

Noyan Tapan
Jul 31, 2007

YEREVAN, JULY 31, NOYAN TAPAN. The issue of providing additional 5
million dollars for the program on development of Armenia’s irrigation
systems will be presented to the World Bank Board of Directors for
approval on July 31.

Vigen Sargsian, person in charge of foreign relations of the WB Yerevan
Office, told NT correspondent that this money will be spent on repairs
of irrigation networks and establishment of water user societies.

YURI HAMBARTSUMIAN SHARES 1-3 PLACES WITH SEVEN POINTS IN CHESS INTERNATIONAL TOURNAMENT OF POLAND

Noyan Tapan
Jul 30, 2007

WARSAW, JULY 30, NOYAN TAPAN. International Chess Tournament named
"Polonia" finished in Poland on July 28. 68 chess players took part in
the competitions held by Swiss contest rules. Armenian representative
Hrant Melkonian with other three participants received 7 out of 9
possible points and shared the first three places. Yuri Hambartsumian
took one of the last places of the tournament table with 4.5 points.

ARMENIA WELCOMES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH

Azat Artsakh Tert, Nagorno Karabakh Rep.
July 26 2007

Armenia has welcomed today the July 19 presidential election in
Nagorno-Karabakh. Below is the statement issued today by Armenia’s
ministry of foreign affairs. "We welcome the presidential elections
held in Nagorno-Karabakh on July 19. Nearly 80% of the people of
Nagorno-Karabakh participated in these elections. These elections are
the most recent in some dozen presidential, parliamentary, and local
election polls, as well as a constitutional referendum, held since
1991. This is just one expression of the commitment the people of
Nagorno-Karabakh have made to democracy and rule of law. Legitimately
elected authorities have succeeded in securing the safety and stability
of that region even in the absence of a permanent settlement. Various
OSCE and other international documents clearly indicate that not only
should Nagorno-Karabakh be a party to settlement negotiations, but that
their elected authorities should represent them. To dismiss these or
any elections is disingenuous and simply contrary to modern political
values. Further, rejection cannot be understood given the fact that
in other areas of the world, in places where final political status
and settlement are also absent, such elections are indeed supported,
promoted, observed and encouraged. The people of Nagorno-Karabakh
remain committed to resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict through
negotiations to reach a peaceful, lasting settlement. Unlike in other
conflicts, in Karabakh, the population has always had to ensure its
own security without the help of the international community. In the
same way, they have also succeeded in securing their own democratic
processes and domestic stability."

DID DEMOCRACY IN KARABAKH BENEFIT MUCH FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION?
Naira Hayrumyan

Lragir, Armenia
July 25 2007

"We do not hold elections and build democracy for the international
community but for ourselves," stated President Ghukasyan. The
presidential candidates and voters endorsed this thesis.

After the voting everyone, including the international observers,
stated unanimously that the most democratic election by far was held
in Karabakh. Certainly, they had observed breaches but they said
that everything was OK. Obviously, the observers wanted Karabakh
to be considered as a democratic country. Did democracy in Karabakh
benefit much from the past presidential election?

Right and need for right

The people of Karabakh got a real right to choose during the past
election. There were at least two ways they could choose. One of
them was not to change anything essential and leave everything the
way it is; the second supposed fundamental reforms which would lead
to more effective public administration. The people of Karabakh chose
the first one.

Does this mean they had no right to choose? The problem is not the
right but the need for that right rather. The growing demand for the
right determined the development of democracy in the country.

Apparently, we do not need our rights and dignity to be protected by
the law but by someone rather. There is no need for several candidates
running in the election with equal opportunities but a favorite who is
known beforehand. There is no need for solution of crucial problems
of the country through public debates but a group of people. There
is no need for respect for people, not taking into account that it
is possible to cheat people with speeches about democracy.

Election and fraud

No election is held in the post-Soviet countries without fraud. When
there is no fraud, the results arouse doubt. A few cases of fraud even
legitimize the election. Everyone, however, even the international
observers passed by fraud so carefully as if the EU would refuse to
recognize the elections if they mentioned those facts. The failure
to mention the cases of wrongdoing harmed democracy more than fraud
itself.

Meanwhile, it was the first election in Karabakh when one of the
most powerful institutions started to work – the proxies. Perhaps
only during the election of the mayor of Stepanakert the proxies of
one of the candidates performed the role of a balance. At that time,
however, they only followed the pre-election process. This time the
proxies reported over half a hundred cases of fraud, by the way,
serious ones. It turned out, however, that our electoral system is
not ready for it. The commissions simply refused to register most
cases of fraud. The media which "enjoyed" the democratic election
also avoided mentioning complaints. Meanwhile, unpunished wrongdoing
is fertile ground for crimes.

Democracy and 85 percent

After all, the voters know how they voted. And if a considerable number
of voters voluntarily and consciously voted for the candidate they
preferred, but many more voters did not vote by their will. Some were
"persuaded", the former position of the present president "persuaded"
others, the third ones were intimidated. And those who used such
methods stained the election which was about to become democratic.

No doubt, Bako Sahakyan could get many enough votes without any
pressure and could win the election with an absolutely real result
of 50-55 percent. However, someone made a fuss on the eve of the
election that some people in the outside are making a world plot
against the government of Karabakh. Allegedly a horrible political
project named Masis Mayilyan was worked out somewhere and launched,
which was meant to divide the society and pose threat to Karabakh.

The political parties and the NGOs came together against this
project. Facing the "threat" of this project, Masis Mayilyan’s
supporters were accused of almost high treason. Rumors were circulated
that the project is funded from somewhere, which will be highly
dangerous. Moreover, they said in case the project "failed", Masis
Mayilyan’s supporters were ready for revolutionary methods. The
fear was so great that almost all the administrative resources were
used. Only the tanks were absent.

Fear did not allow making a realistic evaluation of the situation to
understand that it is just an election. And the person who believed it
is impossible to hold a fair election in the country used his right
to ballot and offer his considerable potential to people. The people
who decided to support him also thought that an election is an arena
for comparing the human and political potential of the candidates
and they supported the one they preferred.

Without this fear Bako Sahakyan would win with a normal 50-55 percent
and would not get the Soviet 85 percent.

As to the "horrible project", a calm week following the election will
confirm there was no plot, especially for a revolution, and someone’s
imagination took a common election campaign of the strong candidate
for a plot.

Good evaluation and blow at democracy

When the international observers who are well aware of the situation
state that the voting was ideal, they strike democracy heavier
than the people who intimidated voters. People stop trusting real
evaluations. They start thinking that the current order does not
differ from the Soviet one when they said one thing, thought another
thing and yet did a third thing but evaluated it as "it should be".

And they stop respecting their own choice. Not one external foe may
strike democracy.

Of course, everything depends on what we compare with. It is possible
that compared with other unrecognized states or Turkmenistan our
election was really super democratic. However, as an Abkhazian
journalist said, "we set the benchmark too high". This is the right
thing, for either there is democracy or there is no democracy. And the
essence of it is that the person chooses the track for development
without any pressure. When a person is respected and not talked to
as a bad student.