CRUMBLING CHURCHES A SIGN OF TURKEY’S DISREGARD FOR ITS RICH RELIGIOUS TAPESTRY

The Irish Times
November 27, 2006 Monday

Rite and Reason As the pope begins a four-day visit to Turkey tomorrow,
attention is likely to focus more on his attitude to Islam and the
country’s application to join the EU than on the plight of Christian
minorities there, writes Sarah MacDonald

A few weeks ago, employees of Diyanet, the Turkish state body for
Muslim worship, called for the pontiff to be arrested on his arrival in
the country, accusing him of violating Turkish laws upholding freedom
of belief and thought and of "insulting" Islam and the Prophet Mohammed
in his Regensburg address last September.

Some Turkish newspapers have suggested that the state has downgraded
its welcome, while the authorities have underlined that protests
against the pontiff will be permitted.

No doubt the Vatican is relieved to hear that security has been
stepped up.

The stabbing of Fr Pierre Brunissen in Istanbul last July was the
third attack on a Catholic cleric in the country this year. There
are just 32,000 Roman Catholics in Turkey.

Sadly, coverage of this historic visit – the first of Pope Benedict’s
pontificate to a Muslim country – looks likely to focus on his
purported "bias" against Islam and Turkey. As a result, the issue of
Turkey’s discrimination against its non-Muslim minorities, specifically
Christians (who comprise roughly 1 per cent of the population),
is likely to be ignored, though it warranted criticism in the EU’s
recent progress report on this country of almost 70 million.

The invitation to Pope Benedict to come to Turkey was extended by
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the leader of Turkey’s Greek
Orthodox Church and spiritual leader of more than 250 million
Christians worldwide.

The Turkish government refuses to acknowledge his ecumenical authority
and bans the use of his title. His flock, which has a 1,500-year-old
presence in Istanbul, is still viewed with deep suspicion.

The French press agency AFP in July 2003 claimed Turkey was "dragging
its heels on reforms for its Christian minority", including basic
rights such as training their own clergy or providing an independent
religious education. A prime example is the state’s closure of the
Greek Orthodox seminary of Halki in 1971.

Religious communities other than Sunni Muslims cannot legally train
new clergy. The ecumenical patriarch’s requests to have the seminary
re-opened have been continually rebuffed.

A 2004 US state department report noted that the "Greek and Armenian
Orthodox communities have lost property to the government in the
past and continue to battle against more losses, because current laws
allow the state agency, Vakiflar, to assume direct administration of
expropriate properties that fall into disuse when the local non-Muslim
community dwindles".

If the number of Christians in Turkey continues to "dwindle" (down
from 207,000 in the 1965 census to 140,000 in the 1995 census), then
the fate of many historically significant churches looks increasingly
likely to be at the mercy of the state.

When I visited Anatolia’s Tur Abdin region last year, members of the
Syriac Orthodox Church complained bitterly at the crisis which these
strictures on seminary formation were imposing.

This ancient community still use a form of Aramaic dating from the
time of Jesus in their liturgy, while their monasteries are some of
the oldest in the world.

The Mar Gabriel monastery was founded in AD 397. However, with no
new priests being trained, they are unable to replace priests who die.

There were just two monks left in the monastery last year.

The conflict in the region between the Kurds and Ankara has driven
thousands of Syriac Christians abroad over the past two decades.

One of the most tragic examples of Turkey’s disregard for its rich
and diverse religious tapestry is its neglect of Armenian monuments
such as the ancient Monastery of the Seven Churches of Varagavank,
near the city of Van.

Despite offers to fund restoration work from abroad, a permit has
not been granted. And so each year its wonderful mosaics fall into
a greater state of dilapidation.

Elsewhere, the wilful destruction of Armenian material has been
documented. Harassment of academics who attempt to collate information
on Armenian material has prompted some to question whether Turkey
has a policy of cultural and historical amnesia towards the Armenians.

This time last year, writer and Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk was facing a
possible jail sentence under Article 301 for having allegedly "insulted
Turkishness" by his acknowledgement in an interview of the 1915-17
genocide in which up to 1.25 million Armenians lost their lives.

Perhaps the Bill passed by the lower house of the French parliament
last month, making it a crime to deny the genocide, is an attempt to
defy this policy of censorship and "forgetting".

It is a contentious move which may kindle even stronger displays
of Turkish nationalism, while undermining those in Ankara pushing a
pro-EU reform agenda. It is certainly unlikely to stem the destruction
of Anatolia’s ancient Christian churches.

For the Syriac Christians, their hope, as one of their priests
explained to me, lies in EU membership, which they believe would
force Turkey to adhere to European democratic standards of tolerance
and respect for its minorities.

Sarah MacDonald is editor of The Word magazine.

A DIFFICULT AND TURBULENT JOURNEY BUT THE POPE IS RIGHT TO EMBARK ON IT

Irish Independent
November 27, 2006 Monday

The political and religious world watches as the Pontiff prepares
for a confrontation with Islam

THERE is, we must suppose, an outside chance that Pope Benedict XVI
could be attacked, or even assassinated, during his visit to Turkey,
starting tomorrow.

Some counsellors within the Vatican tried, for this reason, to dissuade
him from carrying out the trip. But rightly, he insisted on going. A
Pope should be ready to be a martyr for his faith, and there could
be few better reasons for martyrdom than a confrontation with Islam.

It is not that Islam is always an aggressive faith, as some would
have it. But it is the rising power in the world of faith, and in the
world of values. And Benedict, as Joseph Ratzinger, has been studying
Islam and the Koran for many decades.

In the Aegean, the greatest opponent of Islam is not the Vatican –
or at least it hasn’t been since the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. The
fiercest opponent of Islam are the Greek Orthodox – and other Eastern
Orthodox – churches, who are the hereditary opponents of Islamic
power in the region.

Greece versus Turkey has meant, for centuries, Orthodox Christianity
versus Ottoman Islam. The old (and by now probably offensive) joke
that a "Turkish Delight" was a Greek massacre derives from this
deep fault-line.

In the 19th century, William Gladstone was almost as exercised by the
massacres of the Bulgarians by the Turks as he was by the problems
of Ireland. He wrote screeds on this question – which was, for him,
a question of Christianity versus Islam.

A similar perspective arose over the genocide of the Armenians
during the First World War, when, it has been claimed that more than
a million and a half Armenian Christians were exterminated by the
dying Ottoman Empire.

Again, the deep cultural fissure wasn’t just race, or nation, but
religion, and again it was Christians versus an Islamic nation.

Kemal Ataturk, the modernising Turkish President from 1923 to 1938,
secularised Turkey and brought in many other reforms, including the
abolition of the caliphate – rule by a religious authority – and the
advancement of women’s rights. (A quirkey aside to Ataturk’s career
is that he is said to have been an admirer – and possibly a lover –
of the young Zsa Zsa Gabor.)

Rural Turkey was never secularised in the same way as Istanbul and
Ankara – much, perhaps, as rural Ireland retains the practice of faith
while Dublin’s churches grow empty. Yet, after Ataturk’s influence,
Turkey was, until now, easy-going and tolerant about religion, and
never imposed strict laws about liquor, for instance, in the manner
of other Islamic countries; there is even a common Turkish brandy
known as raki. Visitors to Turkey today still find it, overall,
a congenial place, without the prohibitions that now characterise
other Islamic nations.

Yet, more experienced observers note the changes occurring beneath the
surface – an Islamic revival growing apace. Lord Norwich, an expert on
the Eastern Mediterranean, writing as John Julius Norwich, recently
said that the change is profound. "Forty years ago, no politician in
Istanbul went to the Mosque. Now, no major politician dares not go."

And, like all Islamic countries, Turkey’s birth-rate is copious, with
16.62 births per 1000 of the population; whereas its old enemy, Greece,
now has one of the lowest birth-rates in Europe, with 9.72 per 1000 of
the population. If trends continue, the Greeks will be wiped out within
a few generations. And if Turkey should enter the European community,
its burgeoning population could prove a dominant factor in the future
of the Community. (Benedict is known to be opposed to Turkey’s entry.)

Pope Benedict’s mission is primarily, of course, religious, although
the Vatican, being a power in the world, cannot but help wield
political power at least indirectly.

Thus, the watching world makes much of the Holy Father’s meetings
of intentioned "rapprochement" with Islam, through the person Ali
Bardakoglu, the head of Turkey’s religious affairs directorate. The
Islamic Turks have made it plain that they expect the Pontiff to
apologise a little more grovellingly for having been critical of
Islam in his Regensburg address.

And yet, the Pope’s first loyalty must be to brother Christians in
the Orthodox traditions, who, all over the Eastern Mediterranean
are under pressure from the expansion of Islam, from Cyprus to the
Lebanon and to Palestine itself.

In Ireland, we are apt to think that the divisions within Christianity
are Catholic and Protestant: but the religious wars of western Europe
are in the past. We now need to be much more aware of that other
branch of Byzantine Christianity which is effectively in the front
line in the culture clash with Islam – and apparently losing ground.

Benedict cannot assuage the Muslims at the expense of the Orthodox
churches, and he would be a diplomatic genius if he managed to be on
equally good terms with both. However carefully he treads, this is
bound to be a difficult and turbulent journey: but he is absolutely
right to make it.

POPE VISIT LEAVES CHRISTIAN TURKISH VILLAGE COLD
by Burak Akinci

Agence France Presse — English
November 26, 2006 Sunday 2:31 AM GMT

Pope Benedict XVI’s planned visit to Muslim Turkey this week has
the world abuzz, but in Tokacli, the country’s only entirely Greek
Orthodox Christian village, most people couldn’t care less.

"So he’s coming, is he? What do you know…" commented an incredulous
native who said he works for the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in
Istanbul, some 1,100 km (700 miles) away, but refused to give his name.

"After what he said about the Muslims, it would have been better for
him to stay away. I’m surprised he decided to come," said the owner
of the only cafe in Tokacli, 25 kilometers (15 miles) from Antakya.

The thirtyish shopowner smoked up his establishment as he tried
to light the stove, explaining that he too would rather not give
his name, "because I don’t want people to think I’m against peace"
among Christians.

Turkey’s Christian community is no more than 200,000-strong in a
country of 70 million, most of them Greek Orthodox or Gregorian
Armenian.

Tokacli has a population of 350 in winter and more than 2,000 in the
summer, when native sons seeking their fortunes abroad — mostly in
Western Europe — return for the holidays.

They have restored the old homes where they come to live for one month
a year, although some of the modern rebuilding appears to have cost
the village part of its original charm.

Tokacli is attached to the Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch, as
Antakya used to be called, and where St. Peter founded the first
Christian church and where the word "Christian" first originated to
describe the followers of Jesus.

The Patriarch of Antioch himself, however, has been a resident of
Damascus since the 14th century and the people of Tokacli, like many
people in Hatay province, three-quarters surrounded by Syria, speak
Arabic among themselves.

Gathered at the cafe on a recent evening, most of them after a day
working their olive groves — the economic mainstay of the community
— the men of the village made favorable comparisons of the late pope
John Paul II, who visited Turkey in 1979, to Benedict XVI.

Respected community leader Josef Naseh, 53, an archaeologist who runs
a profitable real estate business in Antakya and heads an NGO to defend
community rights, brandished a photo to prove he was the first head of
an Orthodox civic organisation to have an audience with John Paul II,
back in 2003.

"The pope (Benedict XVI) is coming basically to attend mass with the
Greek Orthodox in Istanbul — it is the only reason for his visit," he
said. "If it had been John Paul II, things would have been different."

"He was different," Naseh sighed.

The mukhtar — the village headman — was more enthusiastic about
the papal visit.

"It was a good decision to come to our country — his visit will
contribute to bringing religions together," said Mikail Kar, a brawny
man in his fifties, a cigarette dangling from his lips.

Kar said he returned to his native village only last year to be elected
headman after 28 years in Norway; his "modern mukhtar" aspect shows
as he drives rather than walks the narrow alleys of his village to
meet his constituents.

"The pope is welcome," he said. "But we would have liked to see him
here on our lands as well, where Muslims, Christians and Jews have
always lived in peace, without any problems."

No one remembers the last time there was a religion-related incident
in the village, even as Christian clergymen elsewhere in Turkey
became recent targets of Muslim extremists, like Italian Catholic
priest Andrea Santoro, shot dead by a teenager in February outside
his church in Trabzon, on the Black Sea coast.

After the Santoro killing, followed by at least two more attacks
against Christian clergymen, the Turkish authorities put two bodyguards
on duty to guard Tokacli’s Priest Musa.

But it only lasted a month, because, Kar said confidently, "in any
case, no one ever expected anything to happen here."

TURKEY’S CATHOLIC COMMUNITY, TINY BUT DIVERSE, AWAITS POPE’S VISIT
by Nicolas Cheviron

Agence France Presse — English
November 26, 2006 Sunday 2:24 AM GMT

In Aramaic, Italian or Tagalog, celebrating mass in the Latin,
Byzantine or Armenian rites, Turkey’s tiny but diverse community of
some 28,000 Catholics waits to meet Pope Benedict XVI next week.

Anna Schindler, a Filipina married to a German, is in charge of the
lottery that will allow a handful of faithful to attend the only
mass the pontiff will celebrate in Istanbul, at the Cathedral of the
Holy Spirit.

Of the 1,100 tickets available for event, no more than 700 will go to
members of Istanbul parishes and only 40 to those of the Holy Spirit;
the remainder are reserved for dignitaries on the protocol list.

"I already missed one papal visit — in the Philippines in 1969,"
said Anna, a housewife in a pink dress. "I hope I won’t miss this one."

Many members of the small Filipino community here, mostly domestic
helpers, will miss the mass because Friday is a regular working day
and they will be at their jobs, she said.

Anna is proud to belong to Istanbul’s main Catholic parish and is
part of a new breed that replaced the Levantines of old.

The Levantines were descendants of Italian traders who settled in
Constantinople, as Istanbul was then known, from the 9th century
onwards, when it was still the capital of the Byzantine Empire.

They had their heyday in the 19th century before gradually disappearing
after the modern republic was proclaimed in 1923.

"There is only a tiny handful of them left," said Father Giuseppe
Giorgis, a priest at Holy Spirit. "They are those who couldn’t leave
because of their work or their marriage, or simply because they had
nowhere else to go."

As the crucial link between the eastern and western components of
the Ottoman Empire, the Levantines grew rich over the centuries,
but most left when the republic ended the special privileges they
enjoyed under the Ottomans.

In addition to the handful of old timers, the parish these days is
composed mainly of a few "neo-Levantines" — Western businessmen in
suit and tie — and a growing African community that has made its
home in the notorious neighboring district of Tarlabasi.

The cathedral choir, which for the past two months has been practicing
the papal mass’s pentecostal — hence multilingual — repertoire,
is just as cosmopolitan.

It includes Greek Orthodox, Armenian Catholic and even two Muslim
singers — former divas of the Istanbul Opera whose love of hymns
has made them regulars of the Holy Spirit choir for the past 35 years.

"The key to it all," said one of them, Isin Guven, "is that God is
love. And this is a magnificent family."

Three other choirs will join the papal mass: One Austrian, one Armenian
Catholic and one Chaldean, representing not only the 700 local faithful
but a further 3,800 recently arrived as refugees from Iraq.

The Syriac Catholic Church’s 1,200 members in this country will not
field a choir, but will be represented by its Patriarchal Exarch here.

Mystery surrounds whether the dwindling last remnants of pre-Ottoman
Istanbul, the Byzantine Catholics, will be present to greet Benedict
XVI.

"I know they exist, because I met four or five of them," said Louis
Pelatre, the Vicar Apostolic of Istanbul.

But he could not say whether they would be on the cathedral square
on December 1 to greet the pope.

ARMENIA FM REACHES OUT TO TURKEY ON GENOCIDE RECOGNITION
by Haro Chakmakjian

Agence France Presse — English
November 26, 2006 Sunday 2:00 AM GMT

Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian is reaching out to historical
foe Turkey to normalise ties as the key step toward a political
settlement on the ultra-sensitive issue of genocide recognition.

"For Armenia, recognition (of the genocide) by Turkey is not
a precondition for normal, good neighbourly relations," the
Harvard-educated minister told AFP in an interview during a
presidential visit to Cyprus.

Nine decades after what the Armenians, backed by many historians,
term the genocide of some 1.5 million of their people in the Ottoman
empire, Oskanian said both countries needed to "transcend" the horrors
of their common past.

"This obstacle (of Turkish recognition) can be removed and memories
can be ameliorated by new experiences, by interaction between the
Turkish and Armenian people as neighbours," he said.

However, Oskanian scoffed at a proposal from Turkish Prime Minister
Tayyip Recep Erdogan for historians from both sides to form a
commission to study the bloody events of 1915-1917, which Ankara
refuses to classify as genocide.

"Erdogan’s suggestion was a smokescreen," he charged, asking how
any joint commission could be set up without diplomatic ties between
Ankara and Yerevan, capital of Armenia which gained independence from
the ex-Soviet Union in 1991.

"This is a political issue. You’ve got to address this issue from a
political angle."

Oskanian was also critical of what he called Turkey’s new "state
policy" of denial even as more countries join the ranks of states
that officially recognise the genocide.

"As more countries recognise, Turkey becomes — as the record shows —
more aggressive in its policy of denial … The Turks have never been
this organised at a state level to pursue a policy of denial," he said.

Oskanian pointed to an article in Turkish law which punishes those
who refer to the events of 1915 as genocide.

Dozens of intellectuals — among them 2006 Nobel literature laureate
Orhan Pamuk — have been brought to court under an amendment in the
penal law that makes it a crime to denigrate Turkish identity or
insult state institutions.

The French parliament’s adoption of a bill making public denial of
the genocide in France punishable by law was "a clear reaction to
the aggressive denialist policies of the Turkish government", he said.

Oskanian held little hope in Washington exerting pressure on its
Turkish ally on the genocide issue because of its strategic interests,
but it "must be more assertive in calling on Turkey to open the border"
and normalise ties.

The minister, who himself was born in Syria, denied any gulf between
Yerevan and Armenians of the diaspora, who outnumber their three
million compatriots in Armenia and have been at the forefront of a
worldwide recognition campaign.

"It’s the moral obligation of every Armenian in diaspora and in
Armenia to remember and to pursue recognition because we think that
will be the minimum compensation after almost 100 years," said the
51-year-old minister.

"Today we pursue recognition in different countries through their
parliaments and that can only be pursued by their countries’ citizens."

Oskanian tried to allay concerns that recognition could lead to
claims for compensation. "Armenia today has on its foreign policy
agenda only the issue of genocide recognition. That’s what we are
after as a nation," he said.

But he admitted that the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, a region inside
neighbouring Azerbaijan, where the Armenians set up a breakaway state
in 1992, posed a major obstacle for ties with Turkey.

Ankara’s "unequivocal solidarity with Azerbaijan also works against
Turkey because it undermines their credibility and weight in the
Caucusus … and their claim to be a bridge between East and West",
he charged.

Oskanian dismissed any similarity between Karabakh and a self-declared
Turkish Cypriot statelet in north Cyprus, insisting the former emerged
from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the latter from a recognised
UN member state.

He acknowledged that Cyprus, with its division, and Armenia were
proving obstacles to Turkey’s ambition to join the European Union,
but denied the two countries were working against Ankara.

"The purpose of our visit (to Cyprus) was to activate economic ties.

We do have common issues we discussed but we never ganged up against
anyone," Oskanian said.

On Friday, Armenian President Robert Kocharian, who hails from
Karabakh, laid the foundation stone for a genocide monument to be
built on the Larnaca seafront of Cyprus, where Armenian refugees from
Ottoman Turkey landed.

In rejecting the genocide label, Turkey argues that 250,000 to
500,000 Armenians and at least as many Turks died in civil strife
when Armenians took up arms for independence in eastern Anatolia
during World War I.

CAN YOU SEE THEM MARCHING AS TO WAR? NO, NEITHER CAN I
by Nigel Farndale

The Sunday Telegraph (LONDON)
November 26, 2006 Sunday

When I heard that a Church of England vicar was going on Radio 4’s
Today programme to urge people to boycott British Airways, I thought:
this is more like it, some fighting words at last. The Rev Andy Kelso
had, apparently, been provoked by the airline’s refusal to allow
a check-in worker to wear a small crucifix over her uniform. And
rightly. It is a demented policy. What does BA hope to gain from it?

Does it imagine Muslims will feel less inclined to bomb its planes
just because it cravenly bans Christian crosses?

I thought he was going to say what needs to be said: that we are
still a Christian country, culturally at least; that we still have
only one Established Church, whether BA likes it or not; that MPs
still say Anglican prayers at the start of the Parliamentary day.

I thought he might have some fire in his Anglican belly, this vicar;
that he might be a worthy heir to Bishop Winnington-Ingram who, in
1915, made a passionate demand for the men of Britain to band together
in a great crusade to kill the nation’s enemies: "To kill the good as
well as the bad; to kill the young men as well as the old; to kill
those who had shown kindness to our wounded as well as those fiends
who superintended the Armenian massacres and sank the Lusitania – to
kill them lest the civilisation of the world should itself be killed."

But no. Mr Kelso argued that we should boycott BA because it is
"discriminating" against Christians. It’s come to this: the church
that produced all those rousing, muscular hymns about marching as to
war is now complaining about being discriminated against; the last
resort of the truly impotent. In his grave, wherever that may be,
Bishop Winnington-Ingram must be spinning.

Incidentally, I’m not sure the C of E has quite as much right to feel
indignant about this crucifix policy – now under review by BA – as
has the Roman Catholic Church. Until Anglicanism as we know it today
was invented in the middle of the 19th century, Anglicans regarded the
crucifix as a wicked, heathen, Romish symbol. That was why there was
such a big stink about Elizabeth I wanting to keep one on her altar.

The Church of England prefers to worship… England. That is why its
churches go light on the crosses and heavy on the regimental colours
and roll calls of the Glorious Dead.

At the moment, while we’re looking for a house, we are renting a
farm cottage on the Hampshire-Sussex border. Our nearest neighbours,
living in a shed alongside us, are a herd of rare-breed Sussex cattle
– gorgeous, chestnut-coloured animals recently brought inside for
the winter.

They are sucklers, that is, mothers with their calves who have been
together out in the fields all summer. Now they have been weaned,
mothers in one half, calves in the other, divided by a feeding corral –
but not without much "bealing". For three days and nights the calves
and their mothers called to each other across the barn, then they
stopped abruptly. Their broken hearts had mended, it seemed.

Their emotions – if that isn’t too anthropomorphic a word – had been
cauterised. The ritual reminded me of being sent off to my (Anglican)
boarding school aged 11. New boys were not allowed to see their
parents for three weeks. We cried for most of that time, and then
never cried again. We had been successfully weaned. Three weeks.

Three days. The difference between man and beast.

It is good that attention is being drawn to the one in five patients
who are being forced into mixed-sex wards. Such indignity. While we are
about it, perhaps something can also be done about the way paramedics,
doctors and nurses routinely insult elderly patients by addressing
them by their first names, rather than by their surnames and titles.

I have a bad habit of dipping in and out of novels to read a page at
random, which is not what the author intended. Still, sometimes the dip
can be lucky. The other day, I came across this example of inflation
at work. In Evelyn Waugh’s Handful of Dust, first published in 1934,
one female character says to another: "You look a thousand pounds!" She
means it as a compliment. Today it would be considered an insult.

US MILITARY COOPERATION WITH AZERBAIJAN NOT AGAINST THIRD COUNTRIES – DIPLOMAT

Ayna, Azerbaijan
Nov 25 2006

The USA’s Caspian Security Programme does not prevent Azerbaijan
from forging other military alliances, a US embassy official in Baku
has said. The programme’s name has been changed from Caspian Guard
to Caspian Security to dispel the misconception that the programme
envisages US troops serving in Azerbaijan, Jonathan Henick told Ayna
newspaper’s military supplement. He said that the programme aims to
help Azerbaijan improve its border security. Improving Azerbaijan’s
defences is also the aim of the radar stations in Xizi and Astara
districts, built by the USA and given to Azerbaijan, Henick said. He
stressed that the radar stations were not targeted against third
countries. The following are excerpts from C. Mammadov’s interview
with Jonathan Henick published on Azerbaijani newspaper Ayna’s
website on 25 Nov 06 and headlined "`Our programme is not against
Casfor.’ US embassy representative says cooperation with Azerbaijan
very important in creating regional stability"; subheadings have been
inserted editorially:

A representative of the US embassy believes that cooperation with
Azerbaijan is very important for the maintenance of stability in
the region.

[Passage omitted: brief biography of Jonathan Henick]

Ayna-Army’s latest interviewee is the head of the public relations
department at the US embassy in Azerbaijan, Jonathan Henick. We tried
to shed light on current military-political cooperation between the
USA and Azerbaijan and similar issues.

[Correspondent] Mr Henick, what is your assessment of the level
of cooperation today in the military and security sphere between
Azerbaijan and the USA?

[Henick] I think that we have excellent relations both in the security
and military spheres. As confirmation I can cite the example of the
recent visit to Azerbaijan of a group led by Sgt-Maj Iuniasolua Savusa.

[Passage omitted: on developing the rank of sergeant-major in the
Azerbaijani army]

Before that Gen William Ward came to Azerbaijan. Ward is a four-star
general and this is a very high rank in the army. His visit also
concerned US-Azerbaijani military cooperation.

Next month high-level talks will take place in Baku between the USA and
Azerbaijan within the framework of bilateral military cooperation. A
delegation is due to come to Azerbaijan from Washington to take part
in the talks. I can tell you that these talks are held in turn in
Baku and Washington. During these talks we will look into the full
range of our current cooperation in the military sphere.

US-built radar stations in Azerbaijan not targeted against any country

[Correspondent] Two radar stations are known to have been built in
Azerbaijan’s Xizi and Astara districts with US support. It is also
known that the start-up of these stations caused some displeasure in
Russia and Iran. Overall, at what stage is the work being done within
the framework of Caspian Guard?

[Henick] I am very happy to tell you about this issue. First I would
like to draw to your attention the fact that the programme’s name
has recently been changed. The programme is now called the Caspian
Security Programme. When some people heard the name Caspian Guard they
thought that American soldiers would take direct part in defending
the Caspian littoral states. But this is in fact not the case. This
is the reason for the change in the programme’s name.

As for the radar stations, they belong to Azerbaijan. We set them up
and handed them over to Azerbaijan. It seems to me that it would be
very beneficial for the press or representatives of Russia and Iran
to come and see the radar stations for themselves. I think that if
they saw the radar stations close up, the objectives and functions
of the stations would be perfectly clear to them.

It might be asked why the US government has helped Azerbaijan in this
way. I can tell you that construction of these radar stations was done
in the first place within the framework of Azerbaijan’s individual
partnership action plan [IPAP] with NATO. One of its aims is that
Azerbaijan should guard its own borders. We think that today there is
a danger in the Caspian of illegal trade in arms and narcotics and
at the same time of illegal trafficking in people. We consider that
at present monitoring and preventing this kind of phenomenon is not
only in the interests of Azerbaijan but also of the US government.

I would like to note that these radars have not been directed against
any second or third country. These radars are being used as part of
the IPAP programme. And Azerbaijan is using its own capacities as well.

[Correspondent] The Russian press say that the radars were built
mainly with the aim of monitoring shipments of nuclear components from
Russia to Iran. Do you think it is possible that nuclear components
are being shipped from Russia to Iran via the Caspian?

[Henick] It is not a matter of goods being shipped illegally just
from Russia to Iran. That kind of shipment can use different routes –
for example, from Iran, in the opposite direction, to Russia, from
Turkmenistan to other republics. The US government’s aim is not
to monitor any route in particular. Our overall aim is to improve
Azerbaijan’s monitoring capacity.

Concerning Iran’s nuclear programme, I can tell you that the enrichment
of uranium in this country is creating a big danger. The international
community’s main aim today is to stop this process.

Caspian Security Programme aims to improve Azerbaijan’s defences

[Correspondent] Generally, what’s the main point of the Caspian
Security Programme?

[Henick] It seems to me that the main point of the programme is not
properly understood at present. The Caspian Security Programme does
not envisage military forces. To put it simply, this is the name
of a number of programmes. This programme is targeted at protecting
Azerbaijan’s borders and Caspian coast. The main aim of setting up the
radar stations and giving them to the Azerbaijani side, of military
exercises and of giving ships to the Azerbaijani navy is to increase
Azerbaijan’s capacity to protect on a higher level its own coast line,
its own borders. The Caspian Security Programme does not envisage
US soldiers serving in Azerbaijan. There is no provision for this in
the programme. At the same time, the programme does not oppose other
initiatives or the implementation of other programmes.

The new Caspian Security Programme will not prevent Azerbaijan from
carrying out military programmes or any other initiatives that it
may wish to do with any other country.

[Correspondent] It is known that Russia would like to create a united
Casfor military alliance made up of the armed forces of the Caspian
littoral states. So far only Russia and Iran of the regional states
have agreed on this. Do you think that such an alliance is necessary?

[Henick] I cannot comment on this, because I do not have detailed
information about it. But I would like to note once more that there
is no clause or other provision in our programme that opposes other
initiatives or any other programmes. Azerbaijan must make its own
choice.

[Correspondent] Recently Russia’s [military and defence weekly]
Voyenno-Promyshlennyy Kuryer published a report that the USA is
preparing to hold an international Caspian summit next year.

According to the report, the aim of the summit is to resolve the legal
status of the Caspian and to deprive the Caspian of the status of a
sea in Russia’s zone of influence. How accurate is this information?

[Henick] I have absolutely no information about this. I think that
the legal status of the Caspian is an issue for the Caspian littoral
states and that they must resolve this issue between themselves.

[Correspondent] How does the USA assess Azerbaijan’s position today
on Iran’s nuclear programme?

[Henick] Iran’s nuclear programme is an international problem. This
is at present being discussed by the UN Security Council. Of
course Azerbaijan does not take part in these discussions as it is
not one of the participating countries. The main discussions are
being conducted by the permanent members of the Security Council
plus Germany and Iran and the IAEA as well. Therefore, we have no
complaints or dissatisfaction at all with Azerbaijan’s position
on this issue. Lengthy discussions on this topic are being held at
present. We must wait to see what comes out of this and what decision
the Security Council will take. This is a very important issue.

Azerbaijan making good progress in improving army standards

[Correspondent] The USA is today supporting the Azerbaijani armed
forces in meeting NATO standards. Do you think that the Azerbaijani
government is making effective use of this military assistance from
the USA?

[Henick] This is a lengthy programme and has not yet finished. The
aim of a range of our programmes is to bring Azerbaijan’s armed forces
up to NATO standards.

Azerbaijan is today fulfilling a very positive peacekeeping mission
in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan. I think that the existing effective
cooperation between the USA and Azerbaijan has given very great
assistance in bringing the country’s army to international standards.

We have done important work with the Azerbaijani peacekeeping
battalion. The Non-Commissioned Officers programme is one part of
this overall programme. Of course, other work is being done too. We
are sure that these are positive elements of the overall programme.

We believe that Azerbaijan has made very good progress. We hope that
this progress will continue.

USA does not pay Azerbaijani peacekeepers

[Correspondent] Information has circulated recently about the
misappropriation of the wages of Azerbaijani peacekeepers serving in
Iraq. A representative of the Ministry of Defence has said that the
wages of our soldiers serving in Iraq are paid by the American side.

Is this right?

[Henick] This is not correct. The USA does not directly pay the
Azerbaijani peacekeepers in Iraq. On the basis of American law we do
not pay soldiers in the peacekeeping corps directly. This is an issue
between the soldiers serving in Iraq and their military leadership.

That is to say, the question of wages is solved between the Azerbaijani
peacekeepers and their Azerbaijani leadership. I am sure that close
cooperation will continue between the Azerbaijani peacekeepers and
the US military.

[Correspondent] Are the wages of the Azerbaijani peacekeepers in Iraq
paid from the US budget?

[Henick] The Azerbaijani government itself bears responsibility
for paying wages. Generally, funds are not given from the US
government side. Peacekeepers are financed by their countries. But
the US government supports and assists peacekeepers with transport,
foodstuffs and similar issues.

[Correspondent] This might be an opportune moment to clarify
something. Azerbaijani society does not know how much our peacekeepers
there are paid. The Ministry of Defence has put a ban on this as though
it is a "military secret". Might you have any information about this?

[Henick] The US government does not know what any country pays its
peacekeepers, including Azerbaijan. I don’t know either. Countries
take their own decisions on this.

[Correspondent] Azerbaijan’s national security concept and military
doctrine have not been adopted yet. Many people link this with official
Baku’s difficulty in choosing "a friend". Who do you think Baku is
close to today, the USA, the European Union or Russia?

[Henick] I am sure that Azerbaijan does not have to choose a friend
in isolation. Azerbaijan is conducting a very careful policy and has
very good relations with its neighbours, with the European countries
and with the USA. We know that Azerbaijan has friendly relations with
European countries and the USA. I think that these relations should
exist and be extended with other countries too.

Azerbaijan’s location of key importance for USA

[Correspondent] What is Azerbaijan’s place in the USA’s
military-political strategy?

[Henick] Azerbaijan is a very important partner for us from both
the security and military points of view. Azerbaijan’s geographical
location is one of the main reasons for this. Numerous flights pass
through Azerbaijan’s air space between Europe and Afghanistan and
between the USA and Afghanistan. In fact Azerbaijan’s permission is
very important for us in carrying out operations in Afghanistan.

At the same time cooperation with Azerbaijan is very important
in creating stability in the region. It is very important to have
stability in Azerbaijan from the geographical point of view, since
Azerbaijan is located between Russia and Iran, Europe and Asia. This
need for stability comes even further to the fore in discussions on
energy issues. I can tell you that security issues are one of the
USA’s priorities with regard to Azerbaijan.

[Correspondent] Do you think Azerbaijan or Armenia is more important
in terms of geography for the USA?

[Henick] I work in Azerbaijan. I advise you to approach my colleague
in the US embassy in Armenia on these issues.

Russian radar station not a problem for Azerbaijan’s Euro-Atlantic
integration

[Correspondent] Russia is known to have just one military facility in
Azerbaijan, the Qabala radar station. Do you think that the presence of
this facility could create a problem in Azerbaijan’s future integration
in the Euro-Atlantic space?

[Henick] I do not think that this will create any obstacle to
Azerbaijan’s integration in the Euro-Atlantic space. At the same time
this is a matter for Russia and Azerbaijan.

Democracy and religious freedom can combat extremism

[Correspondent] Commentators say that religious tendencies have
increased in Azerbaijan recently. Do you think that there is a danger
of religious extremism in the country in future?

[Henick] It seems to me that there is such a danger in different
places in the world. Good cooperation between countries is the most
important way to prevent this. This cooperation must take place in
different areas at the same time military, finance, diplomacy and
territorial protection.

Strengthening democracy is another way to prevent extremism. Freedom
for sects and religions, people expressing their views freely can
also prevent this.

At the same time it is important to create strong institutions to
prevent extremism. The presence of a trustworthy parliament, free
and transparent elections can destroy extremism. Should the opposite
be the case, a dangerous situation can emerge: people think and see
that the government does not listen to their voice, does not respond
to them. Then they turn to extremism.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

REGIONAL GOVERNOR IN EASTERN UKRAINE CRITICIZES RULING PARTY

Ukrayina Moloda, Ukraine
Nov 9 2006

Kharkiv Region governor Arsen Avakov has said that the Party of
Regions did not keep its promises made during the parliamentary
election, in particular, regarding language, NATO and people’s
well-being. The following is the text of Avakov’s article headlined
"November propositions" published by propresidential newspaper Ukrayina
Moloda on 9 November. Original subheadings have been retained:

Conclusions on the Rubicon: why did the "blues" win, what mistakes
did the "oranges" make, and is it all right to betray principles.

Weary of the hustle and bustle, the yellow leaves of autumn are
falling. Parting with their leaves, the branches of trees decked with
the blue ribbons of the election winners are growing bare everywhere.

The ribbons are being bared and so are the intentions… [ellipsis
as published]

Leaves, painted the brilliant colours of emotions, are falling to
the pavement, and so, too, are promises, laying bare the blatantly
crude nature of the true positions and promises of politicians.

Nobody is disturbed by the lies, which are becoming obvious.

Deceived yet again after the 2006 elections, society is not even
attempting to analyse the reasons for having been deluded or, more
precisely, self-deluded.

But let us nevertheless examine the key promises of the Party of
Regions, which enabled it to gain a victory in the elections.

Promise number one. Language.

It is easy for me to talk about both the problems of the Russian
language and the problem of the Ukrainian language, because I myself
am practically entirely the product of Russian-language culture. Yet
despite that I consciously consider myself a supporter of the position
that Ukrainian is the only state language in our country; Russian is
the main language of intercourse in the eastern and southern regions
of Ukraine, and nothing more.

I see no problems in communication between Russian speakers and
Ukrainian speakers. These problems arise once every four years,
only before elections. The problems are artificial, premeditated,
make-believe in form, and provocative in content. Because no serious
politician can fail to understand that the State of Ukraine has the
right and is obliged to support the Ukrainian language, if for no
other reason than because Armenia supports the Armenian language,
Russia -the Russian language, Germany -the German language.

Ukrainians, the citizens of this state, and the Ukrainian state must
support the Ukrainian language, because language, among other things,
is the basis of the nation’s culture, its self-identification.

It so happened that for many years the peoples within the borders of
the Soviet Union, in a single polyethnic space, worked together to
create a unique, beautiful culture, the quintessence and expression of
which was the Russian language. It was in the Russian language that
countless cultural masterpieces and artistic monuments were created,
incorporating the entire polyethnic esthetic of cultures from Georgia
to Ukraine, from Moldova to Kazakhstan, from Russia to Armenia. I
love this culture. I grew up in it, and I value highly its beautiful
monuments created in the Russian language, the "great and mighty." And
it is absolutely obvious to me that the Russian language will always
continue to be used and respected in Ukraine. For the educated,
cultured individual, it will always be a vital fount of knowledge,
along with other languages.

But the Ukrainian language -beautiful, melodious, born on this land
– is as natural here as the air that the sons and daughters of this
land breathe, loved by many, many millions of Ukrainians, both ethnic
and those whom fate has bound to this land. It always has been,
is, and must remain the foundation of a unique Ukrainian culture,
of the nation’s spiritual essence, which is the basis on which true
statehood is built.

How long will this inherently unnatural conflict between Russian and
Ukrainian last in Ukraine? Unfortunately, just as long as we, the
generation of people who were born and lived in the Soviet Union,
remain alive – the generation that was the author of this unique
polyethnic Russian-language culture.

And, therefore, it will be our lot to hear many more elections promises
like the one offered by the Party of Regions as the leading proposition
in the 2006 election. This promise to restore Russian as the state
language was largely responsible for the victory of the "Regionals."

This promise is a mirror that reflects the secret hope of a large
number of voters… [ellipsis as published]

Let us imagine, for example, a very learned professor, a wise man, an
intellectual, who lectures at, let’s say, Kharkiv State University. A
true specialist, whom overzealous ministry officials suddenly force
to deliver his brilliant lectures in Ukrainian. And this turns into
torture for the professor!

No doubt that, somehow or other, every lecturer can master a
language, but for some this poses a very serious problem, especially
in the case of an older individual who grew up and was raised in a
Russian-speaking environment, understands it, and feels comfortable
in it… [ellipsis as published] Yet government officials demand that
this individual teach his subject in Ukrainian. And his wonderful
lecturers lose all their brilliance, even though they are delivered
in the state language. In this case, the lecturer, in his heart of
hearts will always set aside any other moral imperatives and based on
his innermost desire will vote for the one who proclaims be it even
a populist but still so appealing to him slogan: "Russian should be
the second state language!" And he will not care whether or not this
proposition leads to a split in the country, to social conflict,
because this promise reflects his wish… [ellipsis as published]
Therein lies the reason for so many votes in support of an empty
phrase, devoid of common sense and elementary culture.

The other side of the coin. What has caused such a metamorphosis in the
consciousness of people for whom Russian is their native language,
the language in which they think and create? Surely the radical
actions of political marginals, the extremely strident statements
by national-patriots, who demand everything and immediately, only
this and literally right now. It is they who have provoked such a
feeling of revulsion against the Ukrainian language among a part of
our intelligentsia.

A government official must deal with tact, sensitivity, and respect
with an issue as delicate as the relationship between languages during
this transitional period in the life of our society.

Promise number two. The anti-NATO promise.

This promise contains equal parts of deception and false propaganda.

The deception lies in the fact that the "Regionals" know perfectly
well that NATO is a broad, modern, international platform and not
the worn-out cliche of an "aggressive military bloc." The falseness
of the propaganda -in the methods used to stir up opinion similarly
to the attacks of the "cold war" period. All the "Regionals" lacked
to complete the picture were the caricatures by the Kukryniks tandem.

It is clear that behind this promise lies a ruthless pro-Russian
order. It is clear that the manipulation of people’s expectations
(everyone expects a peaceful sky) is best done with the help of
fearmongering. Unfortunately, the pressure of Soviet propaganda
has left such a strong imprint on the minds of ordinary people that
anti-NATO sentiments have been very easily resurrected. The current
attempt to shape attitudes towards NATO through a referendum is
cynical. Cynical, because it is very easy to achieve the expected
result: whip up hysteria with the help of leftist marginals and then
drive people to a banal conclusion: I don’t know what NATO is, but
I’ll vote against just in case.

Very important in this respect is the awareness of one universal
fact. NATO is not the one calling on Ukraine to join its community
-it is Ukraine that should be seeking to become a member of this
organization. Just as Ukraine has made joining the European Union
its goal. It is Ukraine, first and foremost, that needs membership in
NATO. The reasoning that, see, Russia is allegedly not seeking to join
the West and we should follow her example is mistaken and dangerous.

At one time France showed the whole world the art of compromise in
foreign policy. Before de Gaulle came to power in 1958, France was
a full-fledged member of NATO – not only American bases but also
the governing bodies of NATO were located on French territory: the
alliance’s Council, Secretariat, and Supreme Headquarters. Moreover,
a contingent of French troops was assigned to the composition of NATO
forces under American command.

In de Gaulle’s view, all this infringed on French interests. The
dependence of Western Europe in security matters was turning into
political dependence. Fearing that France would be drawn into conflicts
that had no bearing on her interests, France left the North Atlantic
bloc in 1966 and assumed a special status. The NATO bloc adapted
to this state of affairs. Paris did not participate directly in the
work of NATO’s military bodies, but maintained missions in them to
coordinate actions. France participated in the work of certain bodies
of NATO’s military-technical infrastructure.

The most important dilemma – combining solidarity with NATO with
an autonomous status in the bloc – was resolved professionally and
diplomatically. De Gaulle’s actions set a trend, especially apparent
in our own time (the independence of the members of the North Atlantic
bloc from the US is growing).

Perhaps Ukrainian politicians should also seek a similar approach
in order to reach a compromise in foreign policy and especially in
domestic politics.

Russia’s tough and irreconcilable policy towards NATO is not a model in
this case. Russia is a completely different country. A rich, ambitious
country, with a strong authoritarian orientation, an imperial ideology,
and actions that are not always well-timed.

"Ukraine is not Russia," as former President [Leonid] Kuchma said. In
that (and not only in that) I agree with him. We have chosen a
European course of development, we are fighting for democracy, we do
not have the natural resources they have, and we are energy-dependent
on Russia. Where we are alike is in that we are also ambitious –
Ukraine is trying to prove to herself, to Russia, and to the world at
large that she is not a borderland but an independent European state.

For that reason, the Regionals’ reversal towards the older brother
is essentially a betrayal of Ukraine, the betrayal of her national
interests. I use such strong language, because I am neither a
Russophobe nor a Russophile. I am a patriot of Ukraine; I find it
extremely offensive that I and my country are being deceived. Doubly
offensive when this is being done by my fellow countrymen.

The "anti-crisis" coalition has decided to undertake a serious revision
of the country’s foreign policy course. And we need to understand
clearly that statements by the new government that shock the world
community are ringing out one after another not for the sake of
carrying out its election promises. The goal is much more serious:
to halt Ukraine’s progress along the path of democracy, consciously
enter Russia’s sphere of influence, and obtain huge political and
financial dividends in exchange.

Promise number three. "A real improvement of life by tomorrow…"

No matter how many times our long-suffering people have got burned
by various political ruses, advertising tricks, and other swindles,
their belief in an unrealizable but "rosy dream" proves to be much
stronger than ordinary common sense.

And politicos take advantage of this belief as they sweepingly paint
a cloudlessly-blue-skied tomorrow. And so the people believe that
promises that Russian gas will not increase but drop in price…

[ellipsis as published] And the residents of multimillion cities
believe that the costs of housing will never rise… [ellipsis as
published] And the voters are being calculatingly deceived with
the fairy tale of the "Five-year development plan"…[ellipsis as
published]

Come to your senses, my fellow countrymen! Why do you allow the rivers
of milk and honey of promises from the country’s political swindlers
to flow?!

The victors will always find a way to explain why they did not keep
their promises -never doubt this, even for a moment. Looking at
you with innocent eyes, offering reasons and speaking with great
feeling, they will describe to you the grandiose mistakes of the
preceding government, they will cite unexpected difficulties, they
will find the necessary wording and metaphors, they will confidently
swear that black is white and vice versa… [ellipsis as published]
And we – not because we believe all this, but because we have grown
tired of the demagoguery – we will stop listening and go about our
business. And those in power – about their business. That is precisely
what they want!

I remember what Charles de Gaulle once said: "Since a politician
never believes what he says, he is quite surprised to be taken at his
word." The political allegories of the Party of Regions played a bad
joke on the voters, because everyone believed much too literally
the promise that "life will be better by tomorrow." Instead,
the country got hard and harsh realities from the victors: the
abolishment of benefits, an increase in the price of gas, rising
rates, tax pressure, a restoration of the old schemes of dealing with
businessmen… [ellipsis as published]

Today’s ruling elite is more cynical than any before it. On the one
hand, the "Regionals" themselves did not expect the extent and the
kind of power they got, not so much won as voluntarily left on the
field of battle. On the other hand, the crisis of statehood produced
by the political reform promotes both boundless political adventurism
and economic redistribution. And so, under the circumstances, it is
irrelevant to consider the people and their expectations; you have
to "take and divide" among the chosen. To divide up power and money,
spheres of influence and parliamentary votes. And whenever necessary,
with diabolical shrewdness, take cover behind the shield with its
tarnished motto of "the will of the voters." Or, "the interests of
Kharkiv residents," for example. Or without any inscription at all,
a mirror-shield, in which are reflected, or, more precisely, from
which all promises, expectations, hopes have been reflected and cast
back… [ellipsis as published]

The mistakes of strategists and the incompetence of tacticians.

I am striving to be objective in my judgments. It is not easy for me,
but I must also say something about the side that lost (or, did not
win) – about the "orange" team.

On this subject, I will use harsher language. After all, I am pretty
familiar with the process from the inside and want to given an
accurate diagnosis.

The "oranges" were failed by the mistakes of their strategists and
the incompetence of their tacticians.

The mistake of the primary strategists lay in that the objectives
set after the triumph of the Orange Revolution (economic reforms,
Eurointegration, the European way of life, NATO, WTO) were absolutely
inconsistent with the rapidity of a realistic pace. This disparity
between time and space produced an avalanchelike disillusionment
in society.

And there is no other word than stupid to describe the tactical
mistakes that were made. They burst forth in all their beauty in the
post-election period: intrigues and vanity, double games and the same
kind of standards, irresponsible statements and petty bargaining,
political activity in diametrically opposed directions, and so on.

Add to this personnel-related blunders, in which revolutionary
expediency in the rotation of administrators resulted in some loss of
professionals and a split in the "orange" camp, and the primary cause
of the defeat of the "oranges" becomes clear: you have to unite "for"
and not "against." It was this collective, national "FOR" that we all
lacked badly right after the revolution and still lack today, even as
the fate of not only the coalition and the opposition but, strictly
speaking, the fate of the nation and the country is being decided.

…November. The branches of trees with the blue ribbons of the
election winners are growing bare. The multicoloured ribbons-promises
of a "better life" are growing bare, the true intentions of those who
made those promises are being laid bare… [ellipsis as published]
But spring will come and cover in green the trees innocent of false
promises. Life will win over the political garlands. Only we must
not let Spring pass us by.

Arsen AVAKOV,

Chairman of the Kharkiv Oblast State Administration

25 October 2006, between the congresses [of Our Ukraine]

I am extremely saddened by that fact that, even while not in power
(de facto, in opposition), Our Ukraine, BYuT [Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc,
and many other patriots and democrats once again cannot unite "for."

I find the position of some Our Ukraine deputies, who are prepared
to shed their principles and convictions in order to join the
"anti-crisis" coalition, totally incompatible with my own views.

We lost the election, but we did not lose our ideals and our voters.

Being in opposition to the existing government, we must work hard
and productively. We must unite all the democratic forces, but not
AGAINST [Prime Minister Viktor] Yanukovych and [Speaker Oleksandr]
Moroz but FOR justice and democratic values.

We have gone through severe trials, but anyone who says that they have
ended is not being honest. We must leave behind all our grievances
and ambitions, rid ourselves of all pettiness and vanity, as trees
rid themselves of their yellowed leaves.

PRO-WESTERN FORCES BEHIND ANTI-ISLAMIC ARTICLE – AZERI PARTY LEADER

Day.az , Azerbaijan
Nov 22 2006

The chairman of the Islamic Party of Azerbaijan, Haciaga Nuri, has
said that the anti-Islamic article published in an Azeri newspaper
was an insult to all Muslims and he praised the people of Nardaran
outside Baku for having the courage to demonstrate and condemn
their publication. In an interview with an Azeri website, he said
he believed there are "certain forces", including the Zionists and
the Armenians, who are behind these provocation which are aimed
at damaging Azerbaijan’s prestige in the Islamic world. He said
Azerbaijan’s pro-western policy has suffered a defeat and the people
are beginning to realize the values of Islam. The following is the
text of his interview, published on the Day.az web site on 22 November
entitled "Haciaga Nuri: I would say that in this situation the people
of Nardaran have saved our country’s image"; subheadings have been
inserted editorially:

An exclusive interview of Day.az with the chairman of the Islamic
Party of Azerbaijan [IPA] Haciaga Nuri.

[Correspondent] What is your opinion of the situation around the
Sanat newspaper?

[Nuri] What can I say? I never thought some of our journalists could
stoop so low that they would start to abuse their own faith and
the Prophet. I don’t want to name these journalists, but by their
behaviour they have not only insulted all the people, but all Muslims
in general. I don’t think they were alone in their actions. I am
more than sure that there are certain forces, who just cannot come
to terms with Azerbaijan’s growing respect in the Islamic world,
who are behind these reports.

Just imagine, this year alone there have been a number of events of
the Organization of the Islamic Conference in Azerbaijan, our country
has started to play an active part in solving the problems of the
Islamic world, and the Islamic countries, by supporting Azerbaijan
unconditionally, have condemned the Armenian aggression. And, of
course, this could not appease the hostile forces who are using
such provocative methods to damage Azerbaijan’s prestige in the
Islamic world.

To our great regret, the accomplices of these forces in Azerbaijan have
started to help them carry out these sordid plans. The Zionists and
the Armenians have long been preparing a plan to sow discord between
Azerbaijan and the Islamic world. And the recent reports are a part
of these insidious plans. The task of our law-enforcement agencies
now is to find out who the patrons of these provocateurs are. And
this is precisely what we, as an Islamic party, are demanding of
our authorities.

[Correspondent] It is common knowledge that the people of Nardaran
passed a death sentence on the writer of this article, Rafiq Tagi. We
would like to know what you think about this.

Country’s image saved

[Nuri] The people of Nardaran could not have acted any differently in
this situation. They passed a death sentence on the enemies of Islam
and the infidels who have brought shame on the whole of Azerbaijan
in the eyes of the whole world. This blasphemy must be punished. Of
course, I, too, am opposed to such measures. However, the feelings of
the people have been insulted and one can understand them. I believe
that the state and our public should not bow down to these people
and the toughest measures should be used against them. I would say
that in this situation the people of Nardaran have saved our country’s
image. Do you recall how the demonstrations in the Islamic world broke
out after the reports in the Danish press? God forbid that we should
see such demonstrations in relation to Azerbaijan. In other words,
by passing this sentence the people of Nardaran have shown the whole
world that the Muslims of Azerbaijan are themselves incensed by this
article. However, I say again that the state should express its opinion
on this question and punish these provocateurs severely. I believe
we will have to wait some time before we can wipe away this disgrace.

[Correspondent] But what about freedom of speech and opinion? The
writer of these articles has expressed his own opinion on this.

[Nuri] Lately we have loved to speculate on these concepts. But
freedom of speech does not mean that anyone has the right to insult
the feelings of millions of people. Nobody has given anyone such
rights. I believe that clauses should be added to the "Law on the
media" seriously condemning such publications. And tough measures
should be taken against those media which break these rules.

Otherwise, we will learn nothing from all these outrageous things
which have been reported in the media lately.

[Correspondent] But the West, too, won’t stand for such a tough stand
against the media, will it?

Values of Islam override pro-Western policy

[Nuri] I can only say one thing. Beginning with the declaration of
independence, all of Azerbaijan’s foreign and domestic policy has
been coordinated with the West. This policy has suffered a defeat.

The people of Azerbaijan are finally beginning to realize that leaning
on the West for support will not restore its territorial integrity and
will not provide a dignified way of life for our citizens. The people
of Azerbaijan are beginning to realize the values of Islam. This
worries the West and the Zionists who want to sow discord in our
society. And did you know that Azerbaijan has entered the list of
those states which are coming under the control of the Zionists? And
so the Western countries, finding themselves under the protection
of the Zionists, will never agree to the values of Islam triumphing
in Azerbaijan.

[Correspondent] I am sure you are aware that some young writers have
renounced Islam. What is your opinion of this?

[Nuri] What is happening in Azerbaijan today cannot be described
other than as an absurdity. It is not they who have renounced Islam,
but Islam has renounced them. These people have taken the path of
Satan. Well, they themselves chose this path and nobody is planning
to stop them. Besides, there are very few of these people. They are
clearly the same kind of provocateurs as Rafiq Tagi, who by such
dirty deeds, are trying to launder the Zionists’ money.

[Correspondent] Iran’s reaction to these reports was also tough.

What’s your attitude to this?

[Nuri] You know, Iran’s reaction was perfectly justified. After all,
such a base article was published not in some other country, but
in Azerbaijan, which is friendly towards Iran. The whole history
and culture of the Azerbaijani people is linked with Islam. And
the publication of this article in Azerbaijan does not, of course,
cause joy in the Muslim countries. These provocateurs do not realize
what a dangerous game they have dragged Azerbaijan into. Therefore,
it seems to me that the sooner we can get rid of this disgrace, the
better it will be for us. Otherwise the wave of indignation will
not be limited to Iran, but will whip up the whole Islamic world,
which is something I am very much afraid of.

GENOCIDE: LE CHEF DE LA DIPLOMATIE ARMENIENNE TEND LA MAIN A LA TURQUIE

Agence France Presse
25 novembre 2006 samedi
Correction Appended 5:09 PM GMT

Le ministre armenien des Affaires etrangères Vartan Oskanian a tendu
la main a la Turquie pour normaliser les relations entre les deux
pays, comme une etape-cle vers un accord politique sur le sujet
ultra-sensible du massacre d’Armeniens au debut du XXè siècle.

"Pour l’Armenie, la reconnaissance (du genocide) par la Turquie
n’est pas une condition prealable pour des relations normales de bon
voisinage", a declare a l’AFP M. Oskanian, lors d’une visite a Chypre,
qui s’est achevee samedi.

La Turquie n’entretient pas de relations diplomatiques avec l’Armenie
voisine en raison notamment du differend sur les massacres d’Armeniens
en 1915-17 sous l’Empire ottoman, qualifies par de nombreux historiens,
le Parlement europeen et la France de "genocide", une appellation
categoriquement rejetee par Ankara.

Les massacres et deportations ont fait plus de 1,5 millions de morts
selon les Armeniens, 250.000 a 500.000 selon la Turquie.

M. Oskanian a estime que les deux pays avaient besoin de "transcender"
leur passe commun.

"Cet obstacle (de la reconnaissance turque) peut etre supprime et
(les idees que les deux peuples peuvent avoir sur l’autre) peuvent
etre ameliorees par de nouvelles experiences", a-t-il ajoute.

Cependant, M. Oskanian a rejete categoriquement une offre turque de
mise en place d’un comite mixte d’historiens des deux pays pour faire
la lumière sur la question.

"La suggestion du (Premier ministre turc Recep Tayyip) Erdogan a ete
un ecran de fumee", a-t-il dit, se demandant comment une commission
conjointe pourrait etre mise en place sans relations diplomatiques
entre Ankara et Erevan, capitale de l’Armenie qui a obtenu son
independance en 1991, après la chute de l’URSS.

"Vous devez gerer ce sujet d’un point de vue politique", a-t-il
poursuivi.

M. Oskanian a critique en outre ce qu’il a qualifie de nouvelle
"politique d’Etat" d’Ankara de negation du genocide.

"Alors que davantage de pays reconnaissent (le genocide), la Turquie
devient (…) plus agressive dans sa politique de negation", a-t-il
estime.

Une recente proposition de loi francaise rendant passible de prison
la negation du genocide armenien est, selon lui, "une reaction claire
a cette politique agressive de negation d’Ankara".

L’ecrivain turc Orhan Pamuk, laureat 2006 du Nobel de litterature,
a ete poursuivi par la justice turque en 2005 pour des propos tenus
sur le massacre d’Armeniens.

Accuse d’"insulte ouverte a la nation turque", il etait passible
de six mois a trois ans de prison. Sous la pression internationale,
les poursuites ont ete abandonnees debut 2006.

–Boundary_(ID_Mb3Kym7Dj4bi3FFX2X3LjQ)–