Pope Benedict’s ‘Soft Tone’ In Turkey Seeks To Win Muslim Hearts, Mi

POPE BENEDICT’S ‘SOFT TONE’ IN TURKEY SEEKS TO WIN MUSLIM HEARTS, MINDS
By John L. Allen

Catholic Online, CA
National Catholic Reporter — ( )
Dec 6 2006

ISTANBUL, Turkey (National Catholic Reporter) – During his first four
foreign trips, Pope Benedict XVI developed the annoying habit of making
the world wait for the big story. In Poland last May, for example,
his speech at Auschwitz, which disappointed some because it offered
no new apology for the Holocaust, didn’t come until the last day. In
Bavaria in September, the pope’s now-famous speech at the University
of Regensburg, which touched off a firestorm of controversy in the
Muslim world, came more than halfway into the five-day trip.

Advertisement In Turkey, however, the biggest splash came on Day 1,
roughly a half-hour after the pope landed at the Ankara airport. In a
closed-door meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
who had been among the most outspoken critics of Benedict XVI after
the Regensburg speech, the pope indicated that he now smiles upon
Turkey’s candidacy to join the European Union.

In reality, Erdogan probably engaged in a bit of spin with regard to
the pope’s comments. It was Erdogan who told the press that the pope
had endorsed Turkey’s EU bid, while the Vatican later clarified that
the pope had not taken a political position for or against admission,
but instead merely affirmed the country’s efforts at "dialogue and
drawing close" to Europe.

Nevertheless, the bottom line is that Benedict XVI effectively
disavowed his earlier position, expressed while still a cardinal,
that Turkey is "in permanent contrast to Europe," and that admitting
it to the EU would further muddy the Christian roots of the continent.

Anyone familiar with even a smidgen of papal history knows that popes
don’t often reverse field in quite so clear a fashion, and the fact
that Benedict did so right out of the gate crystallized the basic
spirit of this Nov. 28-Dec. 1 trip, Benedict’s fifth as pope and his
first to a majority Muslim state: No effort was spared to convince
the Muslim world that "the pope of Regensburg," depicted variously by
Muslim critics as a neo-crusader and as the chaplain to the U.S.-led
war in Iraq, is actually a friend.

In terms of realpolitik, Benedict’s new line on the EU probably
means little in terms of Turkey’s actual chances. It’s hardly as if
the powers-that-be in Brussels were waiting for a declaration from
the pope. This is the same body, after all, that repeatedly spurned
Vatican pleas for even a passing reference to God in the preamble
to the new European constitution. Just 24 hours after Benedict met
with the Turkish prime minister, the European Commission announced a
partial suspension of talks with Ankara, further dimming the country’s
prospects.

At a symbolic level, however, Benedict’s new line sent an unambiguous
signal that he’s willing to go to great lengths to win Muslim hearts
and minds.

At a meeting with diplomats accredited to Ankara Nov. 29, Ambassador
Georges H. Siam of Lebanon complimented Benedict XVI on his "soft
tone" in Turkey, and that in many ways seems an appropriate tag line
for the four-day trip.

Over and over, a series of key words percolated like leitmotifs
through the pope’s remarks: dialogue, understanding, brotherhood and
peace. Repeatedly, Benedict stressed his "great esteem" for Muslims
and, in particular, his respect for Turks, often invoking the memory
of Pope John XXIII, who served as apostolic delegate in Turkey from
1933 to 1945 and is remembered fondly here.

In a speech at the Religious Affairs Directorate Nov. 28, for example,
Benedict expressed "profound esteem for all the people of this great
country," and greeted Turkish Muslims "with particular esteem and
affectionate regard."

In what seemed almost a deliberate counterpoint to his infamous
quotation from a 14th-century Byzantine emperor at the University of
Regensburg, Benedict this time cited an 11th-century pope, Gregory
VII, who said to a Muslim prince in 1076 that Christians and Muslims
owe charity to one another "because we believe in one God, albeit in
a different manner, and because we praise him and worship him every
day as the creator and ruler of the world."

By and large, the Turks seemed to reciprocate. Planned protests
never really materialized, and the coverage in the Turkish press
was overwhelmingly positive. After the first day, and in the wake
of Benedict’s reversal of field on the EU, one Turkish newspaper ran
the banner headline: "It’s a beautiful start."

Small, telling decisions

In a series of small but telling decisions, Benedict XVI appeared to
do everything possible to avoid irritating his hosts. For example:

– At a Mass at Ephesus Nov. 29, he referred to the "witness" of Italian
missionary Father Andrea Santoro, but without mentioning that Santoro
was gunned down Feb. 15 in the Black Sea city of Trabzon by a young
Muslim shouting "God is great!" who later said he had been agitated by
the Danish cartoon controversy. Many Turkish Christians see Santoro
as a symbol of the precarious nature of life in an overwhelmingly
Muslim society, where Christians run the risk of being seen as an
alien element. – At least four times, Benedict made reference to
freedom of religion, but he never linked that generic appeal to
specific problems in Turkey, where Christian churches cannot own
property or enter into contracts, where it is often impossible to
get permits for new churches or to secure visas for Christian clergy,
and where the seminaries of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox
churches have been shuttered by government edict since 1971.

– In his meeting with Patriarch Mesrob II in Istanbul Nov. 30,
Benedict referred to the "tragic circumstances" endured by Armenians
in Turkey in the 20th century, but without using the term "genocide,"
which is anathema to most Turks. His decision is all the more striking
given that John Paul II used the term "genocide" in reference to the
Armenians during his visit to Yerevan in 2001, in a joint statement
with Karekin II, head of the Armenian Apostolic church.

– In impromptu remarks as part of his meeting with Ali Bardakoglu,
head of the Religious Affairs Directorate, Benedict said that his
decision in May to appoint Cardinal Paul Poupard as president of both
the Pontifical Council for Culture and for Inter-religious Dialogue
was not a way to "diminish" the latter office, but to "integrate" and
"reinforce" the work of both. The pope also rejected "Islamophobia,"
and said that he regarded Islam as a religion of peace.

– In an unusual revision to the official schedule, Benedict added a
Nov. 30 visit to the famed "Blue Mosque" in Istanbul. While there, he
donned a pair of white slippers, in keeping with the Islamic tradition
of not wearing shoes inside a mosque, and paused for a moment of what
appeared to be silent prayer alongside his Muslim host. Later he said,
"We pray for fraternity and for all humanity."

– While milling with the small crowd of pilgrims who arrived for
the open-air Mass at Ephesus, Benedict spontaneously picked up a
Turkish flag and briefly waved it, providing a classic image of papal
beneficence toward his host country.

None of this is perhaps surprising, given the powerful incentives
both the Vatican and the Turks felt to make the trip a success. In
the wake of Regensburg, Benedict XVI wanted to convince Muslim public
opinion that he’s a friend of Islam, while the Turks wanted to show
the world that theirs is a sophisticated, pluralistic nation, ready
to take its place in Europe.

In a sense, therefore, the game in Turkey was always Benedict’s to
lose, and he made sure not to put a foot wrong.

Moreover, the challenging line of "the pope of Regensburg" was not
completely absent from Benedict’s appeals in Turkey. Albeit in oblique
form, his twin challenge to Muslims on terrorism and religious freedom
did surface throughout the trip.

"The civil authorities of every democratic country are duty-bound to
guarantee the effective freedom of all believers and to permit them
to organize freely the life of their religious communities," he said
in a meeting with ambassadors Nov. 28. "I am certain that religious
liberty is a fundamental expression of human liberty and that the
active presence of religions in society is a source of progress and
enrichment for all."

Speaking directly to Bardakoglu of the Religious Affairs Directorate,
Benedict called for "freedom of religion, institutionally guaranteed
and effectively respected in practice." That language seemed
deliberate, given that the Turkish constitution guarantees freedom
of religion, but in practice Turkish bureaucrats often make life
difficult for the country’s small Christian minority of perhaps
100,000 believers in a country of 72 million.

Likewise, the pope insisted that religious leaders must "utterly
refuse to sanction recourse to violence as a legitimate expression
of religion."

Nevertheless, the preponderant message delivered on the Turkey trip
was one of friendship, not debate. Though Benedict did not offer any
new apology for the Regensburg address, the entire trip seemed to
have an air of contrition.

Eisn Tunali, 38, is a Muslim covert to Protestantism who drove six
hours to attend the papal Mass in Ephesus Nov. 28. She said the trip
allows Turks to get a different impression of the pope.

"They can see that anybody can make a mistake," she told National
Catholic Reporter. "This is kind of like an apology."

The gamble of the visit appeared to be that if Benedict wants to
challenge Islam to an internal reformation, he first has to establish
his credentials as a friend. Whether that strategy will pay off
remains to be seen. In the immediate wake of the trip, there was no
indication that the Turkish government intends to heed his message
on religious freedom in a new way – for example, by allowing the
Halki seminary of the patriarch of Constantinople to reopen, which
has emerged as a leading symbol of the problem of religious liberty
in majority Muslim states.

The original purpose of Benedict’s trip, which was somewhat
overshadowed by the focus on Christian/Muslim issues and the
prospect of a "clash of civilizations," was to visit the patriarch
of Constantinople, the "first among equals" in the Orthodox world. On
that level, the trip was intended as a further gesture of ecumenical
openness, in keeping with Benedict’s vow one day after his election
in April 2005 that Christian unity would be a top priority of his
pontificate.

Benedict and Bartholomew I, whose formal title is "His All Holiness
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople and
New Rome," celebrated a vespers service together at the Phanar, the
headquarters of the patriarch in Istanbul, on the evening of Nov. 29,
and then celebrated a divine liturgy the next day. The two men blessed
one another, prayed the "Our Father" together, and issued a joint
blessing to the assembly at the Phanar.

"I can assure you the Catholic Church is willing to do everything
possible to overcome obstacles and to seek, together with our
Orthodox brothers and sisters, ever more effective means of pastoral
cooperation," Benedict pledged on Nov. 30.

The pope argued that greater Orthodox/Catholic closeness is especially
important in the context of a Europe seemingly ever more determined
to blur its Christian identity.

"The process of secularization has weakened the hold of that
tradition," he said. "Indeed, it is being called into question, and
even rejected. In the face of this reality, we are called, together
with all Christian communities, to renew Europe’s awareness of its
Christian roots, traditions and values, giving them new vitality."

In their Common Declaration, released Nov. 30, Benedict and Bartholomew
picked up that theme.

"In Europe, while remaining open to other religions and to their
cultural contributions, we must unite our efforts to preserve Christian
roots, traditions and values, to ensure respect for history," the
two leaders said.

To those expecting a more Regensburg-esque, cage-rattling performance,
it was striking that Benedict never explicitly engaged the crisis
besetting the patriarch of Constantinople, who presides over a tiny
flock of roughly 2,000 people, 60 percent of whom are over 50 years
old. As recently as 1950, there were more than 100,000 Orthodox
faithful in Istanbul, but waves of harassment from the Turkish
government have driven most away.

Some issue dire warnings that the Greek Orthodox community in Turkey
may be on the verge of extinction. The Turkish authorities have never
recognized any "ecumenical" role for the patriarch, insisting on
treating him as no more than a local clergyman, and demanding that
the occupant of the office must be a Turkish citizen born in Turkey.

For many Turkish nationalists, the patriarchate is an unwelcome Greek
presence on Turkish soil.

Recalling Christian heritage

Benedict walked up to the brink of acknowledging these realities
in the Common Declaration, where he and Bartholomew recalled "the
Christian heritage of the land in which our meeting is taking place,"
and asserted that this tradition "remains timely and will bear more
fruit in the future."

Yet without directly calling the Turks to task for their neglect of
the patriarch, many observers felt that Benedict’s visit amounted to
a major boon for the local Orthodox community.

"Sometimes when you are living in the shadows of religious
asphyxiation, a brother coming from the West can bring light to the
East," said Father Alexander Karloutsos, an official of the ecumenical
patriarch based in New York who was on hand for the events in Istanbul.

"Peter has come to give strength to his older brother," Karloutsos
told National Catholic Reporter on the margins of the vespers service
celebrated by Benedict and Bartholomew.

Benedict is the third pope to visit the Phanar, following in the
footsteps of Paul VI in 1967 and John Paul II in 1979.

Certainly the Orthodox did everything they could to milk the pope’s
visit for PR value, setting up sophisticated press centers, bringing
in English-speaking spokespersons, and even inviting journalists to a
reception with Bartholomew on the evening of Nov. 30 at the Istanbul
Hilton Hotel.

Yet if the aim of the meeting between pope and patriarch was to
usher in a new phase of Catholic/Orthodox unity, there seemed little
immediate indication that any progress had been made on the one issue
that has long blocked real ecumenical progress – Orthodox concerns
about the power of the pope.

Benedict addressed the issue in his remarks Nov. 30, noting that
"differences of opinion" over the role of the pope are currently
under review in the joint Catholic/Orthodox international dialogue.

He cited Pope John Paul II’s offer in the 1995 encyclical Ut Unum
Sint to reconsider a new mode of exercising the papacy that would be
acceptable to other Christians, and Benedict added, "It is my desire
today to recall and renew this invitation."

Exactly what such a revamped papacy would look like, however, is still
to be spelled out. If anything, Orthodox observers at the Phanar,
watching the massive media and security presence that follows the pope,
as opposed to the near-invisibility of their patriarch, seemed more
conscious than ever of the danger of being swamped in the pope’s wake.

In the final analysis, evaluating the success of Benedict’s Turkey
trip requires defining its aim. If the point was to expand upon
the conversation hinted at in his Regensburg address, about the
relationship between reason and faith and the related problem of
extremism in some currents of Islam, there was little evidence
that much had been accomplished. But if the hope was to reintroduce
Benedict to Muslims as a friend, on that front the trip did indeed
seem to move some opinion.

One Turk put it to a reporter this way: "I’m not sure we like this
pope yet," he said, asking that his name not be used. "But at least
we don’t dislike him anymore."

– – –

John L. Allen Jr. is National Catholic Reporter senior correspondent.

www.ncronline.org

Russian FM Hails OSCE Work On Nagorny Karabakh Conflict

RUSSIAN FM HAILS OSCE WORK ON NAGORNY KARABAKH CONFLICT

RIA Novosti, Russia
Dec 6 2006

BRUSSELS, December 5 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s foreign minister said
Tuesday the experience of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe in resolving the Nagorny Karabakh conflict can be used to
tackle other post-Soviet conflicts.

The conflict over Nagorny Karabakh, a region in Azerbaijan with a
largely Armenian population, first erupted in 1988 when it declared
its independence from Azerbaijan, and moved to join Armenia.

"The approach, which is linked to the use of multilateral forums for
political support for negotiation formats to resolve this or that
conflict, is a good example for other situations, including South
Ossetia, Transdnestr and Abkhazia," Sergei Lavrov told journalists,
commenting on the OSCE chairman’s pledge to make strong progress in
resolving the Azerbaijanni-Armenian dispute during 2007.

During the region’s conflict between 1988 and 1994, over 30,000 people
were killed on both sides. Nagorny Karabakh remained in Armenian hands,
but tensions between Azerbaijan and Armenia have persisted.

Lavrov said the OSCE Council of Ministers in Brussels had coordinated
a statement on Nagorny Karabakh, qualifying it as "comprehensive."

He also said the 56-member OSCE, created as an East-West forum during
the Cold War, needs to be reformed in order to continue its existence.

The Russian diplomat said Moscow wants the OSCE to function
effectively, and that many countries are ready to help the organization
overcome "the current rather serious crisis."

"The OSCE is still failing to find its place in ongoing processes in
Europe, in the spheres of trade and economic, investment and energy
cooperation," he said, adding that reforms are progressing very slowly.

Russia and others have long accused the OSCE of bias, poor governance
and lack of initiative. In mid-2004, they called for sweeping
reforms of the bloc, which also monitors elections, human rights,
arms proliferation, and democracy.

Russia has repeatedly called for a more active approach from
the organization in the fight against terrorism and illicit arms
production and sales, and has criticized the OSCE for focusing on
secondary issues instead of resolving key security problems.

Festival Of Documentary Films To Be Held In Yerevan

FESTIVAL OF DOCUMENTARY FILMS TO BE HELD IN YEREVAN

Yerevan, December 6. ArmInfo. International Festival of Documentary
Films "Entry to Open World" will be held at Yerevan Art Center
"Narekatsi" on December 10-11.

The Art Center told ArmInfo that within two days, the Armenian
spectators will enjoy the works by documentary film directors from
Sweden, Australia, USA, Mexico, India, Iran and Armenia. The short
and long films tell about the life of ordinary citizens who have to
struggle against big and small problems they face. Street musicians,
refugees, illegal migrants, beginner politicians. It is not the full
list of the real heroes of the documentary films. The entry to the
demonstration of the films is open.

BAKU: Divisions Of Armenian Armed Forces Once Again Broke Ceasefire

DIVISIONS OF ARMENIAN ARMED FORCES ONCE AGAIN BROKE CEASEFIRE REGIME
Author: E.Javadova

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Dec 6 2006

The divisions of the Armenian Armed Forces have, once again, broken
the ceasefire regime on the frontline, Trendreports with reference
to the Defense Minister of Azerbaijan.

On 5 December, from at 20:40 to 20:55, the divisions of the Armenian
Armed Forces, located in Chinari village of Barda district of
Azerbaijan, fired at the Azerbaijani Armed Forces located near the
villages of Kokhanebi, Hajihasanli and Agbulag of Tovus district,
with submachine guns and machine-guns.

The Azerbaijani Armed Forces retaliated and no lives were lost.

ARF And Serge Sargsyan Disagree On Karabakh Recognition

ARF AND SERGE SARGSYAN DISAGREE ON KARABAKH RECOGNITION
Hakob Badalyan

Lragir, Armenia
Dec 6 2006

The ploughmen of the National Security Strategy of Armenia led
by Serge Sargsyan, the secretary of the Council of Security under
the president of Armenia and the minister of defense of Armenia,
are aspiring to creating a document which is supposed to guide all
the officials of the Armenian government, Serge Sargsyan says. In
other words, when a public official expresses a stance somewhere,
he or she must be guided by this strategy, be it a stance on internal
or external policies. The authors of this document, and experts and
officials who worked on it and the head of the taskforce assure that
a great number of experts were involved in drafting the document, and
it is a product of collective mind. This implies that the strategy
should at least express the common stance of the present government
on the objectives and directions of the national security of Armenia,
otherwise, one wing of the government or another would be against the
document. Nobody was against. This shows that there is real agreement
inside the government or the document is not important for anyone,
and they just raised a finger for it, or yet the statements that the
document is the result of collective work are false.

The first of the three options was rejected in the parliament. There
is no agreement in the government, and it became clear from the words
of the minister of defense. Serge Sargsyan announced at the rostrum
of the National Assembly that for Armenia that the recognition of the
independence of Nagorno Karabakh by Azerbaijan is more important than
by the international community. The problem is not if the defense
minister is right. The problem is that several days ago Armen
Rustamyan, member of the Supreme Body of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun,
chair of the Committee of External Relations of the National Assembly
stated that if Azerbaijan does not accept the self-determination of
Karabakh, we should leave Azerbaijan and focus on the international
recognition. In other words, it is obvious that the disagreement
between the ARF Dashnaktsutyun in power and Serge Sargsyan in power
on a problem of the present and future of national security such as
the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh. Serge Sargsyan thinks that the
recognition by Azerbaijan is primary, the ARF Dashnaktsutyun thinks
we should leave Azerbaijan and reach international recognition. On
the surface level these approaches may have something in common but
in depth these approaches are contrary. Perhaps, the ARFD could have
said that it is possible to make Azerbaijan recognize through the
recognition by the international community. Or Serge Sargsyan could
say that in order to solve the primary problem of recognition by
Azerbaijan it is necessary to reach international recognition. But
it would be a simplification of the problem. If the recognition
by Azerbaijan is primary, it means it is necessary to reach a
compromise rapidly and sign a peace agreement, otherwise Azerbaijan
will refuse to recognize. If the prime problem is the recognition
by the international community, the compromise should involve the
international community. It is self-evident that a compromise with
Azerbaijan and a compromise with the international community cannot be
the same. In other words, it implies almost fundamental differences
in policy. Consequently, it is evident that Serge Sargsyan and the
ARF Dashnaktsutyun have quite different approaches towards this,
and the question occurs whose approach has been laid at the basis of
the National Security Strategy and who should be obliged to accept
the other’s standpoint in public speeches. If both are laid at the
basis, the strategy is a waste of paper, especially considering that
the Ilyichevsk-Poti ferry is not sailing regularly.

Conflict Around European Academy Of Armenia Runs High

CONFLICT AROUND EUROPEAN ACADEMY OF ARMENIA RUNS HIGH

Yerevan, December 6. ArmInfo. The conflict around the European Academy
of Armenia runs high.

At a meeting of the Government and Parliament members, Wednesday,
Vice Speaker of the Armenian Parliament, Representatives of ARFD
party, Vahan Hovhannissyan, raised the issue of the fate of the
Academy students. His colleague on party, Minister of Education and
Science Levon Lazarian, said the Government has elaborated a program
of rehabilitation of the given educational establishment. The problem
is connected with the certificates of the Academy. L. Lazarian said
that the quality of education at the European Academy does not meet
the necessary standards. In addition, the minister said that the
three key members of the Council of Trustees from Germany, Italy,
and Austria say they were even unaware of their inclusion into the
Council of Trustees and ask not to use their good name. The ministry
had no member at the Council of Trustees either, although it is
a compulsory condition. The minister said that the former French
Ambassador to Armenia has recently applied to him and indicated at
the critical situation at the Academy. L. Lazarian mentioned that
a similar situation was also at the French University. However,
the situation was saved due to the measures taken.

However, Vice Chairman of "Orinats Yerkir" party Mher Shahgeldyan
believes the statements of L. Lazarian groundless. He said that the
representative of the Armenian Foreign Ministry did not attend the
last session of the Council of Trustees of the French University.

However, no one raised the issue of legality of the decisions made by
the Council. M. Shahgeldyan accused L. Lazarian of party "showdown"
and added that the case of the European Academy will be considered
at the court. To recap, Chairman of the Council of Trustees of the
European Academy and French University was Head of "Orinats Yerkir"
party, ex- speaker of the Armenian Parliament. Arthur Baghdasaryan.

Newspaper To Be Independent Of Train Ferries And Different Authoriti

NEWSPAPER TO BE INDEPENDENT OF TRAIN FERRIES AND DIFFERENT AUTHORITIES, LOCAL MASS MEDIA

Yerevan, December 6. ArmInfo. Train ferries and moods of editorial
heads shouldn’t influence newspaper issues in Armenia, representatives
of local Mass Media said in the ‘Urbat’ debate club today.

Astghik Gevorgyan, Head of the Journalists’ Union, said that the
public isn’t interested in reasons of the paper delays. They want
to get their newspaper regularly. She added that the Constitutional
right on freedom of information is under a threat. A. Gevorgyan said
that this is not only an economic problem but a political one as well
and that Armenian government should get down to it.

Hakob Avetikyan, Editor-in-Chief of Azg newspaper, said that it would
be much desired if the government didn’t interfere in Mass Media and
on the contrary, tried to prevent such kind of problems.

Editorial offices will edit their issues in a more expensive editorial
office Noyan Tapan, instead of the present Tigran Mets, till the paper
problem is solved in the country. Boris Navasardyan, Head of Yerevan
Press-Club, presumed that the paper crisis could be connected to 2007
parliamentary elections. He expects anything from this government. He
pointed out that if there are political reasons behind the created
problem it means that the government attempt to violate freedoms of
word in the country.

Nikol Pashinyan, Editor-in-Chief of Haikakan Zhamanak newspaper,
critically said that the nation that submitted to closure of A1+
TV channel, ballot stuffing and other violations at the elections,
would submit to the shortage of paper as well. If the government wanted
they would have organized paper supplies from Ilchyevsk and/or Iran –
they are efficient when it is up to their interests.

Azg and Haikakan Zhamanak haven’t suspended their issues despite the
paper crises in the country.

Ilyichevsk-Batumi Ferry With Armenian Cargoes To Move To Armenia On

ILYICHEVSK-BATUMI FERRY WITH ARMENIAN CARGOES TO MOVE TO ARMENIA ON DECEMBER 7

Yerevan, December 6. ArmInfo. The loading of Armenian cargoes
on Ilyichevsk- Batumi ferry, which will move tomorrow, is nearing
completion, the Armenian Ministry of Transport and Communication told
ArmInfo at 18:00pm local time.

The source reports that the ferry had been idling for 20 days because
of unfavorable conditions. The 100 carriages loaded on the ferry
will arrive in Armenia approximately in 7-8 days. 200 carriages with
cargoes for Armenia have been accumulated in Ilyichevsk.

‘Vimpelcom’ For A Fixed Telecommunication In Armenia

‘VIMPELCOM’ FOR A FIXED TELECOMMUNICATION IN ARMENIA

Yerevan, December 6. ArmInfo. OJSC ‘VimpelCom’ considers a fixed
telecommunication in Armenia a profitable business. The company will
continue this business despite insufficient direct experience in
this field, Vladimir Ryabokon, OJSC ‘VimpelCom’s Vice President on
Corporative Development Issues, said at the press conference today.

The company received a license for the fixed telecommunication from
‘ArmenTel’ and intends to develop this field.

"The company will use the convergent solutions between the fixed
and mobile communication systems", said V. Ryabokon and added that
‘ArmenTel’ can be a good testing base of this kind of users.

Convergent solutions, first of all, aim to increase the number
of communication services and, in the end, they lead to the price
cut down.

Why Everyone Wants To Be President

WHY EVERYONE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT

Lragir, Armenia
Dec 5 2006

On December 5 at the Pastark Club the news reporters asked Khosrov
Harutiunyan, the leader of the Christian Democratic Party, to comment
on the statement of the adviser to president Garnik Isagulyan statement
that Serge Sargsyan is the preferable presidential candidate and he
would make every effort for his election, in the context of the home
political developments. Khosrov Harutiunyan commented generally,
without mentioning the names of Isagulyan and Serge Sargsyan.

Khosrov Harutiunyan only said that the office of the president is,
unfortunately, given too much importance, whereas a political body
such as the parliament is not considered important by the political
forces, therefore political passions clash over the election of the
executive post rather than the parliament, the central institution
which shapes politics.