OSCE REACTS TO FRANCE’S ARMENIAN BILL
By Selcuk Gultasli, Brussels
Zaman, Turkey
Oct 18 2006
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has
reacted to France, whose parliament adopted a bill on Thursday that
makes it a crime to deny that an Armenian genocide occurred in Turkey
during World War I.
In a warning to France, the OSCE explained that if the Armenian
bill became law, Paris would set a dangerous example for other OSCE
member countries.
In a written statement, the OSCE called on the French Senate to reject
the draft if it came before them.
OSCE Media Freedom representative Miklos Haraszti sent a letter to
the president of the French Senate, Christian Poncelet, and expressed
his concerns.
Haraszti asked French senators to reject the Armenian bill on the
grounds that adopting this law would cause serious concerns for
international standards of freedom of expression.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

FRENCH COMPANIES CONCERNED
By Economy News Desk
Zaman, Turkey
Oct 18 2006
Boycotts launched after the passage of the French bill criminalizing
the denial of an Armenian genocide has unsettled French businessmen.
Laurence Parisot, the president of MEDEF (the French Business
Confederation) – described as France’s TUSIAD (Turkish Industrialists’
and Businessmen’s Association) – said that the reactions to the bill
had unsettled French companies investing in Turkey.
Parisot remarked that the French Assembly moved to vote without having
a full understanding of the gravity of the issue and without trying
to appreciate the possible consequences beforehand.
In a statement to the French news agency AFP, he said: “It is not
for companies to write history, nor is it for lawmakers to write it.
Everyone must appreciate their limits and must stay within their
boundaries. Our evaluation of the bill voted in the French Parliament
is that the French parliamentarians overstepped their boundaries on
such a serious and important matter. We must not make such decisions
without considering their consequences. There are many French companies
either operating in or exporting to Turkey. It is not difficult to
foresee that any rash and impulsive reaction given by the Turkish
government and decision-makers in the economic sector would cause
negative consequences for the French companies in question.”
Parisot met with Omer Sabanci, the chairman of the board of directors
of TUSIAD at a meeting organized in Brussels by the Confederation of
European Business (UNICE).
During the meeting, Parisot’s statement came up. Sabanci pointed out
that the parliament’s decision completely baffled the business world
in Turkey and the public.
Sabanci invited Laurence Parisot, president of MEDEF for a year, to
Turkey so he can get to know Turkey better and develop the present
economic ties with the Turkish business world.
“Turkey’s process for full membership to the European Union has got
the full and persistent support of TUSIAD. The French private sector
must also demonstrate its full support to our membership in a much
clearer manner,” said Sabanci.
In order for the bill to become law, the endorsement of the senate
and the president is needed. The bill envisages a one year term
in prison and a fine of ~@45 thousand euros for those who deny the
Armenian genocide.
————————————— —————————————–
No Use of Boycott In the Long Run While reactions against France’s
genocide bill are growing, calls for moderation on the boycott issue
are also on the increase.
Chairman of the Istanbul Chamber of Industry (ISO) Tanil Kucuk said:
“I’m of the opinion that it should not be incumbent on the ISO to
bolster attempts to put an embargo on present investments in Turkey
while making great efforts to attract more of them. If we wrongfully
do so, this will place a question mark in the minds of those willing
to invest in Turkey and considering the present need of Turkey for
more foreign investments, we should adopt a different approach to
the problem.”
Kucuk said that reactions such as boycotting French products would
not bear any fruit in the long run but rather the Turkish private
sector should consolidate ties between the two countries instead of
freezing them.
——————————————- ————————————-
Let’s not Dismiss Commonsense Chairman of the Kayseri Chamber of
Industry Mustafa Boydak accentuated the importance of keeping the
boycott within tolerable limits and emphasized that “when our reactions
are more judicial and rational, they will be more effective.”
We should never dismiss commonsense.
“We are altogether very sensitive about national issues. We should
not respond to France’s mistake with a mistake. That is to say, our
reactions shouldn’t be based on emotions, but rather on intelligence,
we should make great efforts to observe the limits and be imperturbable
all the time. Let’s not forget the proverb, ‘Haste will bring
repentance’. I especially ask you not to get me wrong; I don’t mean
that we should call it quits and leave everything altogether, however
if we react rationally, our reactions will be more fruitful.
Let us be patient and do whatever befits us as a nation.”

TURKISH PARLIAMENT CRITICIZES FRANCE
Zaman, Turkey
Oct 18 2006
The Turkish parliament issued an indirect condemnation of the French
parliament’s acceptance of a bill criminalizing the denial of the
so-called Armenian genocide Tuesday. The common declaration of
the parliament emphasized that acceptance of the bill would cause
irreversible damages to political, economic and military relations
between Turkey and France.
The declaration called France to retreat from its “historical mistake,”
stating that the bill harmed Turkey’s struggle to normalize its
relations with Armenia. The declaration also said that France caused
more than one million deaths in its own past, primarily in Algeria,
and read, “The burden of policies harming Turkey and Turkish people
will be very large.”
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Turkey might apply to
international courts in opposition to the bill that French parliament
accepted.
Gul informed the deputies during a special parliamentary session
that as the government they did their best to prevent the bill
from being accepted, adding: “We have another alternative and our
government will not abstain from applying this method. We will use
all of the means that international law allows, including applying
to an international court.”
Gul emphasized that Turkey was never intolerant to other nations
throughout its long history and added France was trying to provoke
Armenia and the Armenian people just as it did during World War I.
Gul said Turkish culture was based on tolerance, and added: “If
our ancestors had applied assimilation toward the other nations in
the past, behaving in the same way that some countries, which are
giving us ‘civilization’ lessons at the moment, behaved previously,
many religions, languages and religion sects would not have survived
to the present day.”
Gul said if the bill became operant in France, despite all their
warnings, it would be a great shame for France and irreversibly harm
political, economic and military relations between the two countries.
After the special meeting, the parliament accepted the declaration
prepared commonly by the members of all parties in the parliament.
The declaration read the genocide bill was accepted with the votes
of only one out of five French MPs, and many deputies could not
use their votes as they were against the acceptance of the bill and
further emphasized the bill was accepted under strong influence of
the Armenian minority in France.
The declaration also emphasized that although French politicians
thought it was the job of historians to discuss past events when their
own history was concerned, interestingly enough, they thought it was
the right of politicians to decide in Turkey’s case.
The declaration emphasized that in the history of Turkey, no shameful
events have occurred, and as such the Turkish people had nothing to
hide from.
The Turkish parliament declaration also named many distinguished
international historians, including French ones, who did not
describe the events of 1915 as a “massacre,” contrary to the claims
of Armenians.

INTELLECTUALS AND ‘PATRIOTS’
Hazem Saghieh Al-Hayat
Dar Al-Hayat, Lebanon
Oct 18 2006
When Naguib Mahfouz won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1988,
many Egyptian and Arab voices contested and cast doubt on the
announcement. For them, the prize was for Mahfouz’s positive position
toward peace with Israel. It is, therefore, not a reward for Egypt and
the Arabs, but rather for their surrender. It was also offered as an
encouragement for more Arab surrender. A few years later, some were
affected by those critics and, consequently, the respected novelist
was stabbed with a knife.
Recently, Nobel Prize winner novelist Orhan Pamuk was subjected to
a similar defamation campaign in Turkey . The aim, in the eyes of
critics, was to humiliate Turkey through the prize, and depict its
identity as a mixture of confusion and juxtapositions. The irrefutable
evidence was Pamuk’s outspoken objection to the history of his country
toward the Armenians and its policy toward the Kurds.
Also, taking into account the difference between the two situations,
Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi is one of the critics
of Iranian under the Ayatollahs, whose latest victim was Ramin
Jahanbegloo, the intellectual who was coerced to apologize in court for
the kindness of his heart and for falling for ‘Great Satan’s’ tricks.
Between the killing of journalists and intellectuals in Algeria during
the civil war, and the arrest and gagging of their colleagues in Syria,
the fundamentalist terrorism and the Baathist-military ‘modernity’
converged on a position toward these accursed professions, which
deals with knowledge, creativity and criticism.
The hostility toward culture and intellectuals, and the press and
journalists is almost equivalent to the hostility toward the West.
Both complete each other. So long as the cultural and freedom of press
is Western by origin and practice, and so long as the Nobel Foundation
‘implements’ a US colonial agenda, the resistance to culture and
intellectuals, and the press and journalists has become part of
‘patriotism’.
This also occurs in a country such as Russia, where journalist
Anna Politkovskaya was assassinated a few days ago. She was famous
for exposing her country’s brutal policies in Chechnya. As known,
the problem of Russia with the West, before, during and after the
Bolshevik Revolution, strongly related to the Russian Slavic Patriotism
of which Putin has become its latest hero.
Indeed, the tendency to liken these accursed professions to the
Western ‘enemy’ is not something new. Every instance of the tensed-up
nationalistic awakenings in the 20th century has been expressed
in the form of silencing the press and arresting or exiling the
intellectuals. When nationalism was coupled with statist tendencies,
through extensive nationalization; education (not only the culture
and the press) paid dearly.
However, with Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah and Hamas (and Kim Jong Il),
we reach an unprecedented degree of estrangement between what is
‘patriotic’ and cultural. The current political and ideological mood
derives rightness and knowledge from demography and numbers. As it
attempts to widen the gap with the West, it detaches itself from
anything related to it in order to maintain its own original and
‘pure’ identity. Equivalent to this inclination is the growing desire
of the intellectuals and journalists, including those who were once
‘patriotics’, to abandon these populist movements.
Ultimately, it is a perpetual impoverishment in which the sheer
number, the rise in oil prices, or heroism on the battleground
cannot compensate for the mind. That being the case, victory, when
achieved, becomes much worse than a defeat like the Republican one
in the Spanish civil war, which was coupled with ideas, creativity
and cultural mobility.
Such defeat is ultimately turned into an actual victory when Spain
was democratized after the death of Franco. On the contrary, ignorant
victories can, at any moment, turn into defeat.
It may be said, and quite rightly, that George Bush suffers from the
same flaws that we found in these ‘patriotic’ leaders. However, he,
unlike them, is forced to tolerate people like Bob Woodward, while
the Iranian and Syrian Bob Woodwards spend their days and nights in
their prisons.

CHURCHES BEING DESTROYED AND RENAMED IN AZERBAIJAN
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
Oct 18 2006
The archeological expedition to the Khanlar region controlled by
Azerbaijan has submitted a list of the Armenian churches subject
to destruction for ratification. The expedition head, Azerbaijan
State Economic University Professor, Doctor of Historical Sciences
Abbas Seidov made a list of the region’s Armenian churches having no
historical and cultural significance in his opinion. Seidov thinks the
churches should be destroyed. At the same time the expedition headed
by Seidov “for the first time” found out the Life-Giving Cross Church
of VII century and “called” it the Albanian temple of Gharabulagh,
which in Turkic means “a Black spring”.
In recent months a few Armenian churches built in ÕVI-ÕVIII
centuries have been destroyed in the Khanlar, Shahumyan and
Dashkesan regions controlled by Azerbaijan. In reply to the DE FACTO
Information-Analytics Agency’s appeal and protests it was stated
that… the Lutheran churches situated in the regional center of
Khanlar had not been touched.
DE FACTO Information-Analytics agency urges to aid to preserve the
Armenian Christian architecture’s monuments on the territory controlled
by Azerbaijan.
–Boundary_(ID_jOam+q8dzymJ7goyvMr6CQ )–

FOREIGN AID WINS FRIENDS
By John Cheves – Herald-Leader Staff Writer
Kentucky.com, KY
Oct 18 2006
Senator’s generosity rewarded
Susan Walsh/Associated Press file photo U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell,
R-Ky., shown the 2000 Republican National Convention, is chairman of
the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for foreign operations.
Online Chat | 1-2 p.m. today with series reporter John Cheves Coming
Friday | Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, McConnell’s wife Full coverage |
The McConnell Machine
WASHINGTON – One of Sen. Mitch McConnell’s “best friends and buddies”
— his words — is Albert Boyajian, a rich Los Angeles bakery magnate
who is a leader in the Armenian-American community.
What does a Kentucky Republican share with a West Coast ethnic leader?
Money.
Boyajian wants more U.S. aid for his home country in southwestern
Asia. He founded the Armenian-American Political Action Committee to
reward helpful politicians with campaign cash.
McConnell is chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for
Foreign Operations. It meets once or twice a year and draws scant
attention. But it controls more than $20 billion in annual foreign
aid. And it brings McConnell hundreds of thousands of dollars from
people hoping to influence that aid.
Boyajian said he personally educated the senator about Armenia, flying
him there in 1996 for a tour and an interview with the president.
Their friendship has deepened as McConnell boosted U.S. aid to Armenia
up to $90 million a year, or as much as $25 million more than the
White House recommended, since the mid-1990s. He adds many millions
more for specific Armenian projects.
“No one in the last decade has done more for Armenians and Armenia
than Sen. McConnell,” said Boyajian, 66, his voice still thickly
accented after three decades in the United States.
Grateful, Boyajian said he hosts every Armenian-related fund-raiser
held in California for “my good friend Mitch.” (Armenian-Americans in
the Golden State alone have given McConnell about $125,000.) He gives
so much of his own money to Republicans, including McConnell — about
$50,000 since 1997 — that he was awarded the Republican Senatorial
Medal of Freedom by the GOP fund-raising machine McConnell chaired
for four years.
Some conservatives dislike the idea of foreign aid and all those U.S.
tax dollars flowing to other nations.
However, it’s a blessing for McConnell, a senator from landlocked
Kentucky, chiefly home to native-born Americans. Most of his ambitious
fund-raising now occurs outside his state, often in major coastal
cities where ethnic groups are far more politically active.
And he recognizes it. Speaking on the Senate floor 10 years ago,
McConnell told colleagues: “We have a lot of Jewish-Americans who are
interested in Israel, a lot of Armenian-Americans who are interested in
Armenia and a lot of Ukraine-Americans who are interested in Ukraine.”
“Boy, when we hear from them, we get real interested,” he said.
Over the years, McConnell has rejected budget recommendations from
Democratic and Republican presidents and State Departments in order
to give hundreds of millions of dollars in additional aid to those
three countries — Israel, Armenia and Ukraine — while their lobbying
groups donated heavily to him.
McConnell inherited his role as Armenia’s champion from Sen. Bob Dole,
R-Kan., who credited an Armenian doctor for saving his life after he
was wounded in World War II. Dole left the Senate to run for president
in 1996 as McConnell settled in as chairman of the foreign aid panel.
That’s how Yervant Demirjian, an Armenian-American banker, found
himself chatting with McConnell, a Kentucky politician, in Southern
California in 2004.
Boyajian, the bakery owner, organized an Armenian fund-raiser for
McConnell at the Ritz-Carlton in Marina Del Rey, Calif., where the
senator mingled with donors. Those who gave him the most were told
they could accompany him on a chartered yacht cruise. McConnell pledged
continued U.S. aid for Armenia at generous levels and collected about
$35,000, federal election records indicate.
“If I can be candid, McConnell is a good friend of Armenia,” said
Demirjian, who gave $1,000.
“Because there are a lot of us living in California, he periodically
comes out here and thanks us for our support of him,” the businessman
said. “And what do we get in exchange for that support? Nothing more
than a stable supply of foreign aid.”
‘They like my views’
McConnell denied in a recent interview that campaign donations
influence his foreign-aid decisions. He said his career reflects an
interest in promoting freedom and opportunity abroad, from opposing
apartheid in South Africa to pushing for stronger Western relationships
with former Soviet states after the Cold War.
As for his ethnic donors, he said, “I assume they support myself and
others because they like my views.”
But a former State Department leader who worked with McConnell said
the senator’s fund-raising warps diplomacy. For instance, while the
State Department wanted to flexibly dispense aid to former Soviet
states, McConnell tapped Ukrainian-American donors and “earmarked”
— or mandated — $225 million a year for Ukraine.
“Earmarks restrict our ability to do our job,” said J. Brian Atwood,
who spent six years as President Clinton’s administrator of the U.S.
Agency for International Development.
“It makes domestic politics and donations more important than
foreign policy. Russia complained at one point that it was getting
less assistance than Ukraine, which is much smaller but had better
lobbying with folks like Sen. McConnell,” Atwood said.
Because there is a limited sum available for foreign aid — and
McConnell usually trims it — awarding more to one country means
depriving another country or regional program.
Extra aid for Armenia, for example, angers Azerbaijan, its neighboring
rival. Azerbaijan protested in the late 1990s that it received $12
per-capita in U.S. aid compared with Armenia’s $180.
Meanwhile, its territorial disputes with Armenia created more than
half a million refugees on its side of the border.
“Sen. Mitch McConnell … recently notified Secretary of State Warren
Christopher that he would block every attempt to send humanitarian
aid to Azerbaijan,” wrote Galib Mammad, an Azerbaijani diplomat to
the U.S., in a 1996 magazine essay.
“Curiously, McConnell went on record in 1992 as one of only four
members in Congress who voted to allow aid to Azerbaijan,” Mammad
wrote. “Now he has changed his mind, as 1996 is an election year, and
public records show that Armenian-Americans have already contributed
$22,850 to him between August and December 1995.”
McConnell has explained his dedication to Armenia — and, for that
matter, Ukraine — as wanting to establish strong, independent nations
along the Russian border, to curb expansionism. He recently denied
favoring rivals over each other.
“I’ve tried to be even-handed in the dispute between Armenia and the
Azeris,” he said. Early this year, he added, he met with Azerbaijan’s
president in his Senate office.
Yet McConnell openly bragged about skewing U.S. aid toward Armenia
two years ago while addressing the National Pan-Armenian Conference
in Washington.
“I’ll be trying to increase that amount. Armenia received $75
million last year, and that is considerably more than Azerbaijan, an
imbalance that I don’t apologize for,” McConnell told the audience,
which applauded, according to a transcript of the 2004 conference.
“And we will try to achieve such an imbalance again this year.”
True to his word, he earmarked $75 million for Armenia in the 2005
budget — $13 million more than Bush requested — and an additional
$9 million from other aid accounts, mostly military aid. That was
twice the sum he allocated for Azerbaijan, although Armenia has fewer
than half as many people, and less poverty. For the 2006 budget, he
earmarked $75 million in direct aid for Armenia — $20 million more
than Bush requested — plus an additional $6.5 million from other
aid accounts. Again, Azerbaijan received half that.
Capping funding
Sometimes McConnell’s donors want foreign aid to be cut, not increased.
In 1996, the African country of Zimbabwe announced it would nationalize
— seize control of — subsidiaries of foreign corporations on its
soil. This angered the American International Group, an insurance and
financial giant in New York, which owned one of the targeted companies.
So Edmund Lee, AIG’s executive director of international and corporate
affairs, huddled with McConnell’s committee staff. AIG wanted an
amendment to the foreign aid bill that would slash Zimbabwe’s share
unless it backed off.
The online magazine Salon.com published a copy of the follow-up
letter Lee wrote July 17, 1996, to Robin Cleveland, McConnell’s
staff director.
“Dear Robin,” Lee wrote, “I want to thank you again for taking time out
of your schedule to meet with us yesterday afternoon on an extremely
important issue to AIG.
“Attached for your review and consideration is draft language for the
amendment we discussed during our meeting,” Lee wrote. “It would cap
AID funding to Zimbabwe in fiscal year 1997 at $10 million, roughly
a 50 percent cut from 1996 expenditures, unless Zimbabwe waives the
localization requirement for U.S. insurance companies.”
The amendment proved unnecessary. Rather than forfeit aid, Zimbabwe
backed off.
McConnell recently said he remembers nothing about the episode. But
he referred to the threat in a Senate speech July 25, 1996.
“This committee was prepared to deal with a current trade dispute and
nationalization of foreign assets in Zimbabwe, but (it) has withdrawn
action relying on the good faith representations of Ambassador Midzi
of the Republic of Zimbabwe,” he said.
McConnell, running for re-election that year, took $2,000 from AIG’s
PAC within months of the episode and $2,000 more that fall. AIG also
gave $40,000 to the Republican Senate and House Dinner Committee,
to support GOP politicians like McConnell.
Cleveland, the former McConnell aide, now works at the World Bank in
Washington. She declined to comment. Lee remains with AIG as director
of corporate affairs, but he did not want to talk about his work with
McConnell’s committee.
“It was a long time ago,” Lee said.
$20 billion plus: Controlled by Senate Appropriations Subcommittee
for Foreign Operations, under McConnell
$75 million: Amount earmarked in direct aid for Armenia in 2006 budget
by McConnell
$20 million: Amount of aid for Armenia above that recommended by the
White House in 2006
$50,000: Donations Armenian-American Albert Boyajian has given
Republicans including McConnell since 1997
8.htm

CHRISTIAN MIGRATION FROM MID-EAST AT HEART OF PATRIARCHS’ MEETING
by Youssef Hourany
Asia News, Italy
Oct 18 2006
A meeting of the seven leaders of the eastern Churches opened yesterday
in Lebanon. The leaders criticized some Arab states that treated
Christians as second class citizens and fundamentalist groups that
portrayed them as linked to the West.
Beirut (AsiaNews) – How to stop the emigration of Christians –
guarantors of human rights – from the Middle East was the main topic
of the first day of a meeting of the seven patriarchs of the East.
The gathering opened yesterday in Bzoummar, the seat of the
Armenian-Catholic patriarchate on Mount Lebanon. From the start,
participants lamented conditions facing Christians in some Arab states,
where they were treated as second class citizens, made to feel like
“strangers in their homeland” and hence pushed to emigrate.
Significantly titled “The Church and the earth”, the Ordinary Session
of the meeting of the seven patriarchs of the East started yesterday,
Tuesday 17 October, with an appeal to all Christians of the East.
Ending on Friday, the meeting gathers the following patriarchs:
Maronite, Nasrallah Sfeir, Greek-Melchite, Gregory III Laham, Coptic,
Antonios Nagib, Syrian-Catholic, Boutros VIII Abdel Ahad, Latin of
Jerusalem, Michel Sabbah, Chaldean, Emmanuel III Delly, as well as
the host, the Armenian Catholic patriarch, Narsis Bedros XIX.
The Apostolic Nuncio in Lebanon, Mgr Luigi Gatti, greeted the
patriarchs and underlined the importance and meaning of the chosen
topic. He also stressed the value of the Christian presence in this
land, because “Christians must understand that their staying is the
only guarantee of the survival of symbolic values of independence,
pluralism, denominational balance and respect for human rights”. The
pontifical representative expressed hope that dialogue would be
strengthened, as it is the only means capable of fighting fear,
anguish and neglect.
In his opening address, the Armenian-Catholic patriarch talked much
about the hidden danger in the emigration of Christians from the
Middle East. He insisted on the value of the Christian presence
in the region, consisting of testimony and mission. He indicated
wars and social crises as the main historical reasons for migration
that has affected all religious families of the East. But Narsis
Bedros XIX also hit out at the approach of some Arab countries that
treated Christians like second class citizens, making them feel like
“strangers in their homeland”. This attitude was caused by a lack
of trust in Christians, who are often thought to be linked to the
West and to be somehow less Arabic than their compatriots. Moreover,
due to the action of fundamentalist groups, continued the Armenian
Catholic patriarch, we are faced with violence and persecution
against Christians, their churches and their assets, to force them
to leave their land of origin and to emigrate. To this must be added
the incentives offered by countries that need their presence.
The patriarch closed his speech by reiterating the need of keeping
the Christian presence alive in the East and of highlighting their
cause in the international community. Key to the struggle is immediate
solutions for the prevalent unemployment crisis, to give Christians
the jobs they deserve.
;art=7511

RYJKOV: ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ARMENIA AND RUSSIA STIRS UP
Arka News Agency, Armenia
Oct 18 2006
YEREVAN, October 18. /ARKA/. On Tuesday at the 11th session of
the Armenia-Russian Interparliamentary Commission on Cooperation
Co-Chairman Nikolay Ryjkov said the economic cooperation between
Armenia and Russia was stirring up, although mutual commodity turnover
had become difficult, because of worsening of Russian-Georgian
relations.
He also pointed out that separate incidents, taking place with
Armenians in Russia, shouldn’t be considered from the viewpoint of
national discrimination. Meantime Ryjkov admitted that it’s a serious
problem, which shouldn’t be ignored by Russian authorities.
In his turn a member of the Commission, deputy of the RF State Duma
Igor Chernyshov stated that Armenian-Russian economic relations
possessed both progress and unsolved problems.
“Volume of Russian investments had significantly increased. In
Armenia there are 700 enterprises, in which Russia had invested big
funds. Cooperation in banking and energy spheres has also stirred up
between the two countries”, Chernyshenko emphasized.

ULP LEADER: INFLATION – NUMBER ONE PROBLEM FOR ARMENIA’S ECONOMY
Arka News Agency, Armenia
Oct 18 2006
YEREVAN, October 18. /ARKA/. Inflation was the number one problem for
the economy of Armenia, on Tuesday leader of the United Labour Party
(ULP) Gurgen Arsenyan told journalists in Yerevan.
“Our party practically ignores weakening of USD, since the inflation
“eats up” much more funds of the population, than the notorious
“strengthening” of AMD”, he emphasized.
Arsenyan finds that lately inflation has been galloping in the
republic, which gets no adequate reaction of the government and
sturctures, responsible for this sphere.
He said that recently growth rate of the inflation has 2 times
increased, leaving behind the 3% limit, envisaged by the CBA.
“It should have been admitted long ago that the CBA is not capable
of controlling inflation in the country, taking into count the recent
rise in prices in Armenia”, he pointed out.
Arsenyan said that ULP had thrice 3 proposed a bill on measures
preventing the inflation in the RA parliament, which got no proper
feedback of the majority of MPs.
According to the data of the RA National Statistics Service, in
Inflation made 2,3% in September 2006, against December 2005. In
September 2006, the index of consumer prices made 105,9%, compared to
September 2005 in Armenia. As at January-September 2006, in Armenia
index of consumer prices made 102%, against January-September 2006.
According to the state budget, in Armenia inflation is envisaged at
3% level in 2006. Meantime by the end of September the RA government
approved a proposal on moving amendments to the Ra Law On the RA State
Budget for 2006, at that proposing the CBA to support the inflation
at 5% level (±1,5%) in December, as compared to similar period in
2005.
–Boundary_(ID_wOF85V2xmRe5Sy8/fO0kUg)–

FACING CLIMATE CHANGE: ACTION AT LOCAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL
Council of Europe
Oct 18 2006
The Committee on Sustainable Development of the Council of Europe
Congress is organising a hearing to be held in Yerevan (Armenia)
on 19 October .to discuss innovative approaches carried out at local
and regional level in dealing with the challenges of climate change.
The hearing, which will take place in the Ani Plaza Hotel from 1.45
pm to 6.30 pm, will be opened by Armenian Ecology Minister Vardan
Aivazyan and the Chair of the Sustainable Development Committee
Gaye Doganoglu. Gotelind Alber, a specialist on climate policy, will
present the perspectives for the next 100 years and policies at the
international level.
The participants will examine a variety of stake-holders’ responses
to the challenges of climate change. They will examine innovative
approaches aimed at fostering a new energy culture, a mobility society
and sustainable urban planning. The case studies are based on the
policies in the cities of Pamplona (Spain), Oslo (Norway), Paris
(France) and Miskolc (Hungary), as well as the Lower Austria Region.
Communication Unit of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
Tel: +33 (0)3 90 21 49 36 Fax:+33 (0)3 88 41 27 51 [email protected]
Contact in Erevan : Marite Moras, Secretary of the Committee on
Sustainable Development Mobile: +33 (0)6 50 39 29 16 ; E-mail :
[email protected]
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress