VARTAN OSKANIAN’S STATEMENT AT UN GA SESSION
Armenpress
Sept 25 2006
NEW YORK, SEPTEMBER 25, ARMENPRESS: ‘Madame President, It is a pleasure
to congratulate you and to wish you a year that is relatively free
of crises and catastrophes. In other words, a year not like the one
we’ve just had during which my good friend Ian Eliasson successfully
navigated through troubled waters.
The year of turmoil, as he called it, included conflicts, as well
as man-made and natural disasters that required our collective
response. These challenges to our united will are becoming more
numerous, more dangerous and more complex.
Of all the events last year, the one which stood out most tragically
was the war in Lebanon. There I believe we lost a great deal of
credibility in the eyes of the peoples of the world who had a right
to expect that political expediency would not prevail. We watched
with great disappointment and dismay the political bickering within
the Security Council and the reluctance to bring about an immediate
ceasefire, even as the bombs were being dropped indiscriminately.
When any world body or power loses moral authority, the effectiveness
to undertake challenges which require collective response is
undermined.
In other areas, a united international community has succeeded. It
has played a supportive role in the civilized process which brought
Montenegro to this day and this body. Together, we created and
empowered the Peace building Commission and the Human Rights Council
– two bodies which hold great promise in delivering deeper and more
purposeful engagement by a world community committed to building
peace and protecting human rights.
The most insipid and threatening challenges in the world remain those
of poverty and hopelessness. When the world’s leaders met six years
ago, they decided that the UN was the ideal mechanism to confront
the social ills facing our societies, they publicly accepted their
combined responsibility in achieving accelerated and more even social
and economic development. They said to the world that, together, we
will channel international processes and multinational resources to
tackle the most basic human needs. Thus, they placed the principle and
potential of united action on the judgment block. Six years later,
the world continues to watch in earnest to see if individual and
regional interests can be rallied in striving for the common good.
Madame President, We are faced with the same challenges, locally. In
Armenia, we are encouraged and rewarded by our extensive reforms. These
reforms are irreversible and already showing remarkable results.
We are going to move now to second generation reforms in order
to continue to register the successes of the last half decade:
legislative and administrative strides forward, an open, liberal
economy, double-digit growth.
Encouraged by our own successes, this year we have determined to
build on our course of economic recovery and target rural poverty. We
are reminded of the remarkable promise made to the victims of global
poverty in 2000: “To free our fellow men, women and children from the
abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty.” To do this at
home, we will leverage the philanthropy of international organizations
and friendly governments with the traditional generosity of our
Diaspora to build and repair infrastructure, which is essential to
facilitate and enable economic development. But infrastructure alone
does not reduce poverty and remove unjust inequalities. Creating
economic opportunities, teaching the necessary skills – these are
essential to erase the deep development disparities that exist today
between cities and rural areas.
Madame President, we will begin in our border communities, because
unlike other countries, where borders are points of interaction and
activity, Armenia’s borders to the east and the west remain closed. As
a result, regional economic development suffers. But with Turkey, it
is more than our economies that suffer. It is the dialogue between our
two peoples that suffers. Turkey’s insistence on keeping the border
closed, on continuing to prevent direct contact and communication,
freezes the memories of yesterday instead of creating new experiences
to forge the memories of tomorrow. We continue to remain hopeful that
Turkey will see that blocking relations until there is harmony and
reciprocal understanding is really not a policy. On the contrary, it’s
an avoidance of a responsible policy to forge forward with regional
cooperation at a time and in a region with growing global significance.
Madame President, let me take a minute to reflect on Kosovo,
as so many have done. We follow the Kosovo self-determination
process very closely. We ourselves strongly support the process of
self-determination for the population of Nagorno Karabakh. Yet, we
don’t draw parallels between these two or with any other conflicts. We
believe that conflicts are all different and each must be decided on
its own merits. While we do not look at the outcome of Kosovo as a
precedent, on the other hand, a Kosovo decision cannot and should not
result in the creation of obstacles to self-determination for others
in order to pre-empt the accusation of precedence. Such a reverse
reaction – to prevent or pre-empt others from achieving well-earned
self-determination – is unacceptable.
Efforts to do just that – by elevating territorial integrity above
all other principles – are already underway, especially in this
chamber. But this contradicts the lessons of history. There is a reason
that the Helsinki Final Act enshrines self-determination as an equal
principle. In international relations, just as in human relations,
there are no absolute rights. There are also responsibilities. A state
must earn the right to lead and govern. States have the responsibility
to protect their citizens. A people choose the government which
represents them. The people of Nagorno Karabakh chose long ago not to
be represented by the government of Azerbaijan. They were the victims
of state violence, they defended themselves, and succeeded against
great odds, only to hear the state cry foul and claim sovereignty and
territorial integrity. But the government of Azerbaijan has lost the
moral right to even suggest providing for their security and their
future, let alone to talk of custody of the people of Nagorno Karabakh.
Azerbaijan did not behave responsibly or morally with the people
of Nagorno Karabakh, who it considered to be its own citizens. They
sanctioned massacres in urban areas, far from Nagorno Karabakh; they
bombed and displaced more than 300,000 Armenians; they unleashed the
military; and after they lost the war and accepted a ceasefire, they
proceeded to destroy all traces of Armenians on their territories. In
the most cynical expression of such irresponsibility, this last
December, a decade after the fighting had stopped, they completed the
final destruction and removal of thousands of massive hand-sculpted
cross-stones – medieval Armenian tombstones elaborately carved and
decorated.
Such destruction, in an area with no Armenians, at a distance from
Nagorno Karabakh and any conflict areas, is a callous demonstration
that Azerbaijan’s attitude toward tolerance, human values, cultural
treasures, cooperation or even peace, has not changed.
One cannot blame us for thinking that Azerbaijan is not ready or
interested in a negotiated peace. Yet, having rejected the other
two compromise solutions that have been proposed over the last 8
years, they do not want to be accused of rejecting the peace plan on
the table today. Therefore, they are using every means available –
from state violence to international maneuvers – to try to bring the
Armenians to do the rejecting.
But Armenia is on record: we have agreed to each of the basic
principles in the document that’s on the table today. Yet, in order to
give this or any document a chance, Azerbaijan can’t think, or pretend
to think, that there is still a military option. There isn’t. The
military option is a tried and failed option. Compromise and realism
are the only real options. The path that Nagorno Karabakh has chosen
for itself over these two decades is irreversible. It succeeded in
ensuring its self-defense, it proceeded to set up self-governance
mechanisms, and it controls its borders and its economy. Formalizing
this process is a necessary step toward stability in our region.
Dismissing, as Azerbaijan does, all that’s happened in the last 20
years and petulantly insisting that things must return to the way
they were, is not just unrealistic, but disingenuous.
Madame president, Nagorno Karabakh is not a cause.
It is a place, an ancient place, a beautiful garden, with people who
have earned the right to live in peace and without fear. We ask for
nothing more. We expect nothing less.’
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PARLIAMENTARY LABYRINTHS
By Nazlan Ertan
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Sept 26 2006
Opinions
Relations between Turkey and the European Parliament have always been,
to say the least, bombastic, although, admittedly, Turkey has never
gone as far as member state France, whose onetime Foreign Minister
Herve de Charette called the European Parliament “a parliament not
worthy of that name,” when the latter criticized a French bill to
crack down on illegal immigration and toughen conditions for residence
permits. Yet, the tone between Ankara and the only directly elected
body of the European Union has remained cold, hostile and laden with
mutual name-calling.
Part of the reason for this has been the European Parliament
itself. Many would refer to the Parliament as the “conscience of the
EU” — based on its focus on human rights, individual liberties and
freedom of expression. Others would refer to it as the cacophony of
Europe, where any idea, any national interest or even cliche will
find at least one supporter.
For some time, European Parliament deputies have come under strong
pressure for mismanagement, misconduct, even corruption, that ranged
from employing their own family members as staff to acceptance of
gifts, trips and even cash from lobby groups. The deputies have also
been accused of ignorance, lack of research and having no idea of
what they were voting on, or, indeed, what they are proposing. They
have also been accused of carrying their national agenda to that of
Europe and prioritizing their national interest over the collective
one of the Union.
In my years as Brussels correspondent, I have come across both
excellently formed, independent minded and knowledgeable deputies who
looked for innovative ideas and, alternatively, backbenchers who were
at the mercy of their assistants, lobbies or national interests.
Among the many rapporteurs of the past decade, there were those
who carried great weight in their party group, such as Austrian
Socialist Hannes Swoboda, or French Conservative Alain Lamassoure;
or those who were selected because of a certain vision toward the
Eastern Mediterranean and Turkey, such as French Gen.
Philippe Morillion. There was also the problematic Arie Oostlander,
who looked and acted as if he paid his first-ever visit to Turkey
only after he was appointed to the post.
Then came Camiel Eurlings, an excellent representative of the young
generation of politicians in the European Parliament, open, photogenic
and plainly devoid of political weight in his party group, Foreign
Affairs Committee and Parliament.
Then the result: a European Parliament report that establishes,
for the first time, the recognition of the Armenian genocide as a
precondition to Turkish accession to the European Union. It adds two
other “genocides” — that of Pontic Greeks and Syriacs to the bill.
Because we journalists have the memory of elephants, we know that
this is hardly the first time that certain groups in the European
Parliament wanted this done. In the late 1990s, there were efforts to
attach a similar amendment to the report of Swoboda, who rejected it
and announced, if this was ever done, he would remove his name from
the report — a major scandal, had it happened.
Turkish diplomacy has certainly come a good way in playing the game in
the labyrinths of the European Parliament. Through laborious attempts
at all levels, it has established relations with different committees,
Parliament civil servants and leaned heavily upon certain key members
of important parliamentary groups. Experienced ambassadors who made a
lifetime career of the European file, as well as bright young diplomats
continue to pass through the Turkish Representation to the European
Union in Brussels.
So what happened?
Before the EP’s key vote this week on the Eurlings report, where
the young MEP is certain there will be improvement, let us ask the
following questions: At what stage did Turkey become aware of those
amendments? Does it have the necessary links with Parliament and key
party groups to be told about such amendments in time? What did Turkish
diplomats and politicians do when they learned about it? Does Turkey
have the necessary network in Parliament to counter the anti-Turkish
lobbies, from Armenians to Greek Cypriots to pro-Kurdish groups? Are
we benefiting from the parliamentary dimension of the Civil Society
Dialogue with the European Union?
Or do we think that sending Parliament delegations to the EPA so that
they can fight among themselves is effective diplomacy?

MY JOURNEY FROM HATE TO HOPE
By Line Abrahamian
Reader’s Digest, Canada Edition
October 2006
The Armenian Genocide almost annihilated my ancestors. How could I
not hate Turks?
When I heard in April that Turkey threatened economic sanctions against
Canada and recalled its ambassador because Prime Minister Stephen
Harper publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide, all the anger I’ve
felt towards Turks came rushing back. Why do they use scare tactics
on anyone who acknowledges that, between 1915 and 1923, the Ottoman
Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians in the first genocide of the 20th
century? Twenty-one countries have recognized it, and the European
Union has been urging Turkey to face up to its past if it wants to
join. I know you should never hate, but how else am I supposed to
feel about a nation that tried to annihilate my ancestors-and is
still denying it?
Instinctively I cringed when a co-worker first told me his wife was
Turkish. As an Armenian-Canadian, I’d been raised with stories of the
Genocide. I was five when I first saw a black-and white photo from the
massacre, of a crying Armenian boy so emaciated his ribs were sticking
out. That kid could’ve been me. So at age five, I decided to hate all
Turks. At my Armenian school in Montreal, the worst insult you could
hurl at another kid wasn’t a four-letter word, it was “Turk lover.”
Three years ago, at 28, I met my co-worker’s wife. She was the first
Turkish person I had ever met. I shook her hand and smiled. She was
lovely, but when we sat down and talked, it was not about the past.
And that bothered me. I think I expected her to apologize profusely
for what her ancestors did in 1915 or to slam her government for
nearly a century of denial. She didn’t. So I decided to hate her, too.
It might have been irrational, but I wasn’t alone in feeling this
way. When I asked an educated Jewish woman how she felt whenever
she met a German, she offered up a guilty smile. “Whenever I meet
an older German, I wonder, Were you the one who pushed my aunt into
the oven? And if it’s a young German, I can’t help but think, Did
your grandparents kill any Jews during the Holocaust? In my mind,
I know I shouldn’t feel this anger. But my heart won’t let me forgive.”
This, even after Germany apologized and made restitutions. All over
the world, Holocaust deniers are shunned and put on trial. Yet Turkey
has gotten away with denying the Genocide for 91 years because most of
the world doesn’t know that before Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia and Nazi
Germany, the Ottoman Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians in massacres
and deportation marches through the deserts of Mesopotamia (parts of
today’s Turkey, Syria and Iraq). Many people don’t even know what an
Armenian is-“So you speak Arabic?” “No, I speak Armenian.” “Right. Your
country is Russia.” “No, my country is Armenia.” The victims are
largely unmourned. And last year Turkey dragged its most renowned
novelist, Orhan Pamuk, to court for “insulting Turkishness” after he
was quoted as saying a million Armenians were killed in his country.
Can you blame me for holding a grudge?
I walk into Manoug Khatchadourian’s apartment and hug him. We’ve
never met, yet I feel an instant connection. Manoug, 104, is a
Genocide survivor.
He asks me to make Armenian coffee, expecting that since I’m Armenian,
I must know how to brew it-like baking choereg (Armenian bread)
or cooking dolma (stuffed vegetables). I don’t. Still, I have a go,
but it turns out thick and gloppy. Manoug takes a sip and cringes,
not subtly. I smile apologetically. But he has survived far worse
than bad coffee.
My eyes fix on a painting above Manoug’s head. A Turkish soldier is
stabbing an Armenian woman. Another is ripping a baby from his pleading
mother’s arms. An Armenian mother is cradling her dead daughter.
“How could I not hate them?” says Manoug, his body trembling. “They
killed our mothers, fathers, children! No, I can’t forgive them. I
still live it today.” His mind races back to a day in his childhood,
on the deportation march in Mesopotamia, in July 1915.
“Have you seen Mama?” 13-year-old Manoug asked pleadingly, but the
haggard Armenians mutely trudged past him, their tongues lolling,
and threw themselves into a puddle of rain mingled with animal urine.
They hadn’t had a drop for two days. Manoug had wriggled through the
throng to fetch water for his family but had now lost them. “Have
you seen Mama?” he asked anyone who would listen. But no one had.
The caravan set off once more. It had been four weeks since they’d
been dragged from their homes in Kharpert, and every day marchers died
of hunger, thirst, heat-or the dagger of a guard. Now Manoug was alone.
Suddenly a band of Turkish and Kurdish marauders came riding down with
a roar. The frightened marchers scattered, but many were trampled
under crushing hooves. Horsemen snatched up pretty girls and looted
marchers; a few fell on a woman and began breaking out her gold teeth
with a hammer.
Then a Turk started chasing Manoug. The boy ran, but his legs were
weak. His assailant caught up, throwing Manoug to the ground, beating
him fiercely with his bayonet, then stripping off his clothes.
Bloody and naked, Manoug staggered behind a boulder and collapsed.
Some Armenian boys rushed to help him. “Leave me,” Manoug breathed.
“I’ve lost my family. This is where I want to die.”
The phone rings in Manoug’s apartment. As he answers it, I think,
How could he not hate the Turks? My eyes stray back to the painting. I
hate them all over again.
As I enter the Ararat carpet store in Montreal, I can almost hear
the giggle of my six-year-old self, climbing up carpet mountains and
through carpet tunnels with store owner Kerop Bedoukian while Dad
was with clients.
“This place hasn’t changed much since you were last here, has it?”
asks Kerop’s son, Harold, who inherited Ararat when Kerop died in
1981. But it has. The carpets are neatly displayed on the floor
instead of rolled into fun tunnels for the pint-sized and pigtailed.
Kerop’s office looks different, but his original desk is still there.
And tucked in a bookshelf is The Urchin, the book he wrote about his
experiences on the deportation march. When I was a girl, I had no
idea the man who playfully scaled carpet hills with me had climbed
different kinds of mountains in the summer of 1915.
Nine-year-old Kerop couldn’t remember the last time they were allowed
to rest. They clambered up yet another mountain, flanked by a steep
drop. His eyes were fixed on a donkey swaying dangerously under its
load. It lost its footing and toppled over the edge. The boy peeked
down to see if donkeys land like cats do. They don’t. But he wondered
why the lady who’d been leading it hadn’t let go of its halter when
it fell. So many marchers tripped and toppled, reminding Kerop of
shooting stars.
It was almost dusk. Still they ploughed on. Kerop noticed a Turkish
guard creep over. He seemed intensely interested in someone in the
caravan. The guard quickened his pace, slunk deep into the crowd-and
pounced on a girl, drag-ging her behind a boulder as she kicked and
screamed. Soon, the guard reappeared, pulling up his pants, and strode
away. Kerop waited for the girl to emerge, too. But she didn’t. She
must have been 15.
“I hated them for destroying an innocent and beautiful girl,” Kerop
later wrote in The Urchin.
Harold tells me now, “That was the first time my dad said he felt
hatred for Turks. But he didn’t hate all Turks.” His family had
Turkish friends who trudged with them as far as they could on the
deportation road, Harold explains. “I’m less generous in my anger than
he was. Still, your generation seems to feel the strongest. When my
son was ten, he came home one day with ‘Death to all Turks’ written
on his arm. We were stunned. We’d told him about the Genocide but
hadn’t taught him to hate.”
Every April 24-Genocide commemoration day-thousands of Armenians
converge in front of the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa and chant,
“Recognize the Genocide!”
I was there as a five-year-old. At that age, do we even know what
we’re fighting for? We do. Every one of the 27 years she has been a
teacher at an Armenian kindergarten, my mom has taught children about
the Genocide.
I ask her if she thinks five is too young to hear about this. “You
have to put it in their blood early on,” she says, “otherwise they
won’t grow up with that fire in their belly to fight for our cause.
That’s what we did with you.”
“So would I be less loyal to my heritage if I didn’t hate Turks?” I
ask her.
“Yes,” my mom replies unflinchingly.
“So it’s okay for me to hate another human being?”
“No, not just anyone,” she says. “But after what they did, how could
you not hate a Turk?”
“But is it fair not to distinguish between the generations?” I venture.
“Fair?” she snaps. “When they were massacring the Armenians, did they
distinguish between the women, the children, the elderly? And today’s
Turk is just as bad, for denying it happened.”
I’m watching the documentary The Genocide in Me, in which 32-year-old
Armenian-Canadian filmmaker Araz Artinian tries to understand her
father’s obsession with his heritage through a personal journey that
leads her back to the roots of it all.
Five-year-old Vartan Hartunian clutched his father’s hand as Turkish
soldiers herded hundreds of Armenians into a church in Marash,
in the southern Ottoman Empire. Suddenly, horrifying shouts issued
from nearby. Vartan peered outside and saw Turkish soldiers pouring
kerosene on a neighbouring church and setting it on fire, ignoring
the cries of the men, women and children inside.
A woman emerged from the flames. A soldier shot her down. The fire
soon silenced the voices within the church.
Now, inside Vartan’s church, thick smoke was filling the air. The
men madly tried to contain the blaze, but it was too wild. Suddenly,
bullets whizzed overhead-Turkish soldiers had opened fire. The
Armenians flung themselves to the floor, but the gunfire intensified.
There was no escape. Tears streaming down his face, Vartan’s father
huddled with his family and cried, “My dear ones, don’t be frightened,
soon all of us will be in heaven together.”
“I’ll never forget that,” Vartan, 86, recalls. His voice trails off.
The camera keeps rolling. A moment later Artinian asks, “Do you hate
the Turks?”
I listen closely, expecting to hear “Of course! They tried to burn
us alive!”
“No,” he says. “I don’t hate the Turks. Hatred is like putting poison
in your own psyche. If you hate a Turk, you don’t hurt a Turk; you
hurt yourself. My criticism of the Turks is in their [government’s]
official denial of the Armenian Genocide. I think this hurts the Turks
because it prevents them from coming up into the class of civilized
nations who are admitting past errors. I don’t feel angry.
I feel sorry for them.
“Armenians must learn that there are good Turks, and many Armenians
will testify that Turks helped them survive. Unless we break through
the walls of hatred, the question of Genocide is never going to
be resolved.”
I couldn’t believe it. How could this survivor feel no hatred, yet
I do?
Since my first meeting with his wife had soured, my co-worker found
me a new Turkish friend. Born in Istanbul, she moved to Canada three
years ago. “You’re going to love her!” he said. I doubted it.
I call her, and she immediately invites me to her apartment. Walk
into the enemy’s turf? “Sure, I’ll see you soon,” I say hesitantly.
I knock on her door, and a short brunette with a warm smile opens it.
“Come in,” she stretches out an enthusiastic hand. The apartment
is Bohemian and homey-save for a mannequin in her living room. She
chuckles, saying she often dresses it and it has become part of
the family.
I laugh-I never imagined a Turk could have a sense of humour. My
anxiety melts. I tell her of my reservations about coming over and
ask if she feels any animosity towards Armenians.
The woman (who agreed to use her name but later changed her mind) tells
me her parents never brought her up to hate, but in school there was
an implicit hatred. She hadn’t even heard about the Genocide there;
no teacher dared talk about it, and history books taught them that
during World War I, the Armenians were stirring for independence,
revolting against an already crumbling Ottoman Empire by joining forces
with the Russians. So in self-defence the Ottoman Turks “relocated”
these rebellious Armenians.
I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. If they were deporting the
“rebellious” Armenians, why deport women and children? Why were
Armenians deprived of food and water? Why were girls raped and babies
killed? If they were being “relocated,” why had most Armenians in
the Ottoman Empire disappeared?
I finally find my voice. “How did they justify what happened on the
deportation marches?”
“They say, ‘It was wartime, you have to accept that.’ But,” she
presses on, “I found myself questioning, Why are we supposed to hate
Armenians? If [their deaths] were a terrible consequence of a terrible
war, why cover it up?”
She found the answers in university, during the classes taught by
influential Turkish historian, Halil Berktay.
“Then it started to dawn on me that it really was genocide,” she
reveals. “I realized there wasn’t one single interpretation of
history, as the nationalist ideology claimed. What do nationalist
leaders do? They choose a scapegoat. In this case, the Armenians. The
other side is, the Ottomans were responsible for what went wrong,
which is true, but the government is having a hard time saying that
because the Ottomans are where we come from; how can we be associated
with murderers?”
“Has any Armenian told you, ‘Your ancestors killed my ancestors’?” I
ask.
“No. And if they did, I don’t know how I’d react. If you dismiss me
like that, you’re closing dialogue forever.”
The problem, she says, is the majority thinks the Ottomans back then
are the same as Turks today. “Now when I meet an Armenian, I feel like
making an explanation that I’m not associated with Ottoman Turks or
people who deny the Genocide.”
I must have a look on my face somewhere between admiration and
confusion that Turks like her exist: She asks, “Hasn’t it occurred
to you that not all Turks are bad? That there might be Turks who
recognize the Genocide?”
“Honestly…no,” I reply.
She tells me there are more of them than I think. “Then, why don’t
we hear more from you guys?” I ask heatedly.
“When you talk about this in Turkey, there’s the danger of going
to prison or being persecuted. But I do feel responsible for doing
something in Turkey to open up discussion.”
Still, many Turkish youth know nothing about the Genocide, “because the
only side they’ve been exposed to is what’s in their history books,”
she says. “Should they be blamed? Perhaps, for not being curious about
all sides, for blindly accepting as truth what they’re being told.”
We talk for hours, about everything from the Genocide to our careers
to relationships. As I leave, she asks, “It was strange to hear
that you hated all Turks. So when you meet a Turk you actually like,
do you start questioning hating all of them?”
The word Turk still sends chills up my spine. But when I left the
young Turkish woman’s apartment, I didn’t hate her.
In her I no longer saw that soldier in Manoug’s painting, ripping
the baby from his mother’s arms; I saw a friend.
But later, when she told me she couldn’t be part of this article, my
heart sank. My first instinct was to dismiss her as being “like every
other Turk.” But then I read that another Turkish scholar is facing
trial for referring to the Genocide in her book. How can I dismiss
an entire nation when there are some fighting for us? How can I hate
a Turk who tells me she’s striving for Genocide recognition-even if
it’s in the privacy of her living room?
I’m not ready to say I don’t hate Turks in general. But I don’t want
to hate. I don’t want to teach my kids to hate. In this violent world,
I don’t want to believe blind hatred is the solution.
Hopefully that makes me no less of an Armenian-but more human.
te_to_hope.php

ADVICE FOR MR. EURLINGS
by Recep Guvelioglu
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Sept 25 2006
Opinions
The European Parliament’s rapporteur on Turkey, Camiel Eurlings, said
that “Turkey must reconcile with its history and have good relations
with its neighbors.” It is a nice remark. Personally I agree with him.
Digging up the ashes of history will not do any good for the future. We
should forget the atrocities of the Bulgarians in the 19th century
Balkan Wars, we should wipe out our memories about what the Arabs
did to the Ottomans with British gold during World War I. We should
bury the inhumane atrocities committed by Arabs in Damascus and other
parts of the Islamic holy land in 1916-17.
We shouldn’t even take events of the past into account when dealing
with them in 2006. Let bygones be bygones. However, I think that this
advice should also be given to our neighbors.
Let me remind you of some events to clarify what I’m trying to
say. Saudi Arabian authorities decided to demolish a Turkish castle
in Mecca called Ecyad which was built by the Ottomans to defend the
holy Kaaba. And they did it.
Can anyone explain to me the reason for dismantling that historical
castle other than the greed for money?
Turkish words praising the holy prophet and Islam carved in the
columns of the Holy Prophet’s tomb in Medina were covered over in
cement by the same Arabs. Only one was left uncovered and readable:
“Visitors greet and pray your pure existence with thousands of
salutes”(Bin salat ile selam eyler zuvvar pakine).
Is there anything in these words that offends Arabs?
The covered words were also carved over with almost the same words,
only in Arabic. Again, what was wrong with them other than the fact
that they were in Turkish?
These few examples basically show the Arab view of Turks.
Now let me give you another example.
According to the news, a poll was recently conducted in Armenia
about the people’s opinion of other countries. According the poll,
79.6 percent of Armenians have a positive opinion of Russia and 49
percent of the United States. But they consider Turkey (80.1 percent),
Azerbaijan (86.5 percent) and Georgia (54.7 percent) as their “enemy
countries.” A total of 57.7 percent of respondents advocated the
opening of Armenia-Turkish borders, and one in three Armenians is
against this.
I have nothing to add to that.
Let’s say that same type of poll was conducted in Greece; the result,
I am sure, would be close to the Armenians’. They might not say
“enemy,” but will never say friend.
But believe me, I understand Arabs, Armenians and Greeks.
What if we did the same thing in Turkey?
The result would be nearly the same.
That reminds me of a story told by Zulfu Livaneli. He was giving a
concert with a Greek singer in a town on Crete. In the audience was a
heavily built old man wearing traditional Cretan clothes. The German
TV station covering the concert did an interview with him. He said
that he came to the concert to watch “the Turco.”
When they asked his opinion of Turks, he said, “They are our
enemies.” Then the reporter asked why he came to watch Livaneli. “Are
you a German?” the old man asked. The reporter said he was. Then the
old man concluded, “You can’t understand.”
Now, Mr. Eurlings. This is the Middle East. “You can’t understand.”

“JOURNALISTIC ORGANISATIONS ARE CONCERNED”
A1+
[12:16 pm] 26 September, 2006
The remarks and suggestions of Journalists’ Union, Yerevan Press
Club and “Internews” NGO on the draft amendments to the RA law on
“Television and Radio”
Taking into consideration the freedom of expression, media diversity
and their significant role in the society as well as the necessity
of establishing democratic, legal system, we present the following
observations; 1. Certain amendments to the bill, with the exception
of Article 21 referring to the appointment of the members to the
Nation Commission, are not in line with the motives of the draft
admission. Article 83.2 of the Constitution, according to which an
independent regulating body is formed by law to provide freedom of
mass media and diversity, cannot serve a convincing basis to endorse
such amendments.
On the other hand, the contents of Article 21 with its current
formulation doesn’t comply with the demands of Article 83.2 lest the
change of National Commission members according to the constitutional
demands are made clear. In fact, this is an attempt of avoiding
adjustment of the legislation to the constitutional amendments in
close future. Taking into account the fact that the current members
are appointed by the RA President, we suggest involving 8 members
elected by the National Assembly in the Commission. As a result of
this members will be elected equally by the RA President and by
the National Assembly. Besides, the demands of Article 11 of the
Constitution according to which “current members must hold their
posts by the time their term of office stipulated by the RA law on
“Television and Radio” has expired” will not be breeched. 2. We assume
that the attempt of the government to put the draft amendments on the
agenda of the national Assembly without holding public debates and
consultation with market representatives will have its side-effect
on the quality of the Law.
Besides, in comparison with the adopted democratic principles,
it merely ignores the opinion of civil society. We also think
that the annulation of the advertisement restrictions is a
real threat as it offers unequal conditions at the market of
advertisement. It is obvious that such amendments must be taken
into serious consideration. The interests of private TV Companies
and audience must be taken into consideration as well. 3. Reminder:
the bill doesn’t reflect the opinion of international organisations
and NGOs, a number of suggestions made on the legislation as well as
the provisions of consultations 96 (10) and 2000 (23) of the Council
of Europe. Finally, in regard of the absence of Commission’s freedom,
the draft amendments may strengthen the negative phenomena connected
with the sphere regulation and worsen the current situation.
We voice hope that the RA Government and National Assembly will take
into account our observations and suggestions and will hold mass
discussions on the bill.

EURASIA FOUNDATION SUPPORTS RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL COMMUNITIES
Armenpress
Sept 26 2006
YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 26, ARMENPRESS: More than 190 NGOs and informal
community groups in Armenia’s regions will gain access to trainings
and resources through a program administered by Eurasia Foundation’s
(EF) representative office in Armenia, enabling them to play a more
effective role in the development of rural communities.
An official from the Foundation told Armenpress that a total of
$130,000 was awarded to nine organizations to build their ability to
serve as hubs and resource centers for local NGOs and citizens. The
grants will expand the services provided by these nine resources
centers, allowing them to provide trainings to local NGOs in skills
such as participatory needs assessments, program development and
fundraising, community mobilization, and monitoring and evaluation.
The centers will also provide basic support such as Internet access,
translation, and copy and fax services.
“By strengthening the capacities of local NGOs and citizen groups
to tackle issues of local importance, EF hopes to build local
ownership of the development process and engage community members
in the decision-making processes,” says Ara Nazinyan, EF’s Country
Director in Armenia.
In order to ensure the long-term sustainability of each resource
center, the Foundation will also support capacity development
activities for each partner organization so that they can later provide
trainings and other services on a fee-for-service basis to other NGOs,
donors, businesses and community groups.
These organizations were identified by EF through an open grants
competition and selected due in large part to their strong potential
for organizational sustainability. They will be linked through network
of Resource Centers for Community Development to promote the exchange
of information and experiences between centers. The centers are:
NGO Center for Civil Society Development (Lori), Martuni Women’s
Community Council (Gegharkunik), Kaghni Social Ecological Governmental
Organization (Tavush), Huysi Kamar Gyullibulagh NGO (Shirak), Civil
Initiative Center Vahagni XXI NGO (Lori), Goris Youth Union Public
Organization (Syunik), Nvatshum Youth NGO (Tavush), the A.D.
Sakharov Armenian Human Rights Protection Center (Shirak), and Sisian
Development Center Public Organization (Syunik).
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RADIO FREE EUROPE/RADIO LIBERTY, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC
_________________________________________ ____________________
RFE/RL Iran Report
Vol. 9, No. 35, 26 September 2006
A Review of Developments in Iran Prepared by the Regional Specialists
of RFE/RL’s Newsline Team
******************************************** ****************
HEADLINES:
* IRAN MAJOR SUBJECT OF UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETINGS
* U.S. REPORTERS BANNED BY IRAN
* IRANIAN BANK SEEKS TO COUNTER U.S. OFFICIAL’S ALLEGATIONS
* U.S. CRITICIZES IRANIAN RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION
* EX-PRESIDENT KHATAMI GETS COURT SUMMONS DURING U.S. VISIT
* IRAN SENDS MIXED MESSAGES ON URANIUM ENRICHMENT
* TOP SHI’ITE CLERIC CHALLENGES POPE TO DEBATE
* FOREIGN MINISTRY GETS NEW SPOKESMAN
* IRAQI PRIME MINISTER VISITS IRAN
* IRANIAN, BRITISH CONSULATES ATTACKED IN IRAQ
* IRAQ-BASED EX-MKO MEMBERS SEEK WESTERN ASYLUM
* DAMASCUS RECEIVES IRANIAN SECURITY OFFICIAL
* INSURGENTS IN SOUTHEAST IRAN REPORTEDLY HALTED
* MAN ARRESTED FOR PROTESTING DEATHS OF POLITICAL PRISONERS
* REFORMIST DAILY CLOSED
* DISSIDENT’S LAWYER FACES COURT ACTION
* CONCERNS PERSIST ON STATE OF PRISONERS
* ACTIVIST SAYS FEMALE ADDICTS, PROSTITUTES PROLIFERATING IN CITIES
* IRAN PREPARES FOR ‘SACRED DEFENSE WEEK’
* IRAN READIES FOR HOLY MONTH OF RAMADAN
* EARLY RACE FOR CLERICAL ASSEMBLY GETS BITTER
******************************************* *****************
IRAN MAJOR SUBJECT OF UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETINGS. In his September
19 address to the UN General Assembly, U.S. President George W. Bush
directed some of his comments to “the people of Iran,” according to
the White House website and Radio Farda. Bush told Iranians that the
“greatest obstacle” to determining their own futures, having a
rewarding economy, and a society that lets them fulfill their
potential is their “rulers,” who “have chosen to deny you liberty and
to use your nation’s resources to fund terrorism, and fuel
extremism, and pursue nuclear weapons.”
Bush said Iran must abandon “its nuclear weapons ambitions,”
adding that the United States does not oppose Iran’s having a
peaceful nuclear program. “We look to the day when you can live in
freedom — and America and Iran can be good friends and close
partners in the cause of peace,” Bush said.
Bush went on to advise the Syrian people that “your
government is turning your country into a tool of Iran,” adding,
“This is increasing your country’s isolation from the world.”
President Mahmud Ahmadinejad addressed the UN General
Assembly on the evening of September 19, “The New York Times”
reported. Ahmadinejad said the UN Security Council, of which China,
France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are
permanent members, is not impartial. “Excellencies, the question
needs to be asked, if the governments of the United States or the
United Kingdom commit atrocities or violate international law, which
of the organizations in the United Nations can take them to account?”
Ahmadinejad asked.
In discussing the recently concluded conflict in Lebanon,
Ahmadinejad said, “Apparently the Security Council can only be used
to ensure the right of the big powers.” He criticized the Security
Council for not demanding a cease-fire in Lebanon more quickly.
Ahmadinejad made repeated references to the council’s legitimacy.
Ahmadinejad addressed similar themes during a September 21
press conference in New York. He said, “Some root causes of
today’s problems of humanity are coming from the world order that
we believe remained since World War II,” RFE/RL reported. Ahmadinejad
continued: “This is an old system, it leads a few to see themselves
as the owners of the world and see others as their belongings. Some
like to rule the whole world and this has led to injustice in world
relations.” Ahmadinejad repeated his earlier criticism of the
Security Council, and he called for a change in the status quo,
saying, “All nations should have equal rights, all peoples and
nations are respected, all have the right to have a respectable life,
all have the right to access justice, all have the right to peace and
calm.”
Earlier, Ahmadinejad attended a two-day summit of the
Nonaligned Movement in Havana that concluded with a September 16
statement supporting a peaceful nuclear program in Iran,
international news agencies reported. The statement also proposed a
nuclear-free Middle East and urged Iran to cooperate with the UN
nuclear inspectorate verifying the peaceful nature of its program, AP
reported.
Ahmadinejad held talks with participating statesmen on the
sidelines of the summit, including the presidents of Algeria,
Belarus, Venezuela, Sudan, and Bolivia, and the crown prince of
Qatar, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported on September
17. Ahmadinejad’s program reportedly included signing five
agreements with Cuba, and the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA)
reported that he also met with ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro.
On September 17, Ahmadinejad traveled to Venezuela, where he
was greeted by President Hugo Chavez and a 21-gun salute, IRNA and
Fars News Agency reported. Ahmadinejad is expected to sign 25
agreements to form joint ventures in the oil, petrochemicals, mining,
and farming sectors to produce medicines, train steel-industry
workers, and produce surgical equipment and plastic packaging, EFE
and globovision.com reported on September 17. Ahmadinejad said
shortly after his arrival in Caracas that Iran and Venezuela have
“common ideas” and “interests” as they fight “global hegemony,”
globovision.com reported. (Bill Samii, Vahid Sepehri)
U.S. REPORTERS BANNED BY IRAN. Iran’s Islamic Culture and
Guidance Ministry announced on September 20 that U.S. reporters will
not be allowed to work in Iran, state television reported. The move
reportedly came in response to Washington’s alleged refusal to
issue visas for all the reporters wishing to accompany President
Mahmud Ahmadinejad during his visit to the United States to address
the UN General Assembly.
The State Department, however, denies refusing visas to the
journalists, RFE/RL reported on September 21. It says Iranian
officials withdrew the visa applications. (Bill Samii)
IRANIAN BANK SEEKS TO COUNTER U.S. OFFICIAL’S ALLEGATIONS. The
Bank Saderat Iran announced on September 10 that all its activities
comply with Islamic law and with international regulations, IRNA
reported. The announcement added that the bank’s extensive ties
with foreign financial institutions make it immune to any actions by
the United States.
The Iranian bank was responding to a September 8 speech by
U.S. Treasury Department Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence Stuart Levey at the American Enterprise Institute in
Washington. Levey announced that Bank Saderat is prevented access to
the U.S. financial system because its activities aid terrorist
organizations. “Iran provides Hizballah with hundreds of millions of
dollars each year, which is why I have said that Iran is the central
banker of terror,” Levey said. “It is remarkable that Iran has a
nine-digit line item in its budget to support Hizballah, Hamas, and
other terrorist organizations at the expense of investing in the
future of its young people.” Levey went on to say that he and other
U.S. officials will travel to the Middle East and Asia to discuss
“measures we should all be taking to protect ourselves from
Iran’s use of the international financial system to advance its
dangerous policies.”
In Singapore on September 16, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry
Paulson discussed Iran with finance ministers from the G-7 (Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United
States), international media reported. Paulson reportedly warned
against the activities of companies that are suspected of serving as
fronts for Iranian weapons programs and which are reputedly used to
support terrorism, “The New York Times” and “The Wall Street Journal”
reported on September 18.
Ibrahim Sheibani, governor of the Central Bank of Iran,
announced on September 16 that Iran is converting some of its dollar
reserves to other currencies, state radio reported. Sheibani said the
step is a reaction to U.S. sanctions against the Bank Saderat,
announced by Washington in early September. “We intend to pursue all
legal means and we expect the International Monetary Fund to adopt an
appropriate stance against this unilateral and illegal move,”
Sheibani added. (Bill Samii)
U.S. CRITICIZES IRANIAN RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. Iranian Foreign
Ministry spokesman Seyyed Mohammad Ali Husseini said on September 17
that the most recent “International Religious Freedom Report” from
the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,
and Labor, which was released on September 15, is politically
motivated, Fars News Agency reported. Husseini said the reports shows
that Washington is not really interested in human rights or religious
liberty, and he claimed the report’s real purpose is to further
U.S. foreign policy objectives. Husseini said the report is of “no
value.”
The State Department report accuses the Iranian government of
“restricting religious freedom”
( 2006/71421.htm). Shi’ite
Islam is Iran’s state religion, and the report referred to
difficulties faced by the Baha’i, evangelical Christian, Jewish,
Sufi, and Zoroastrian minorities: “There were reports of
imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on
religious beliefs.” The situation has worsened since the election of
President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, the report alleges. (Bill Samii)
EX-PRESIDENT KHATAMI GETS COURT SUMMONS DURING U.S. VISIT. Seven
Jewish-Iranian families filed a lawsuit in a New York federal court
on September 7 claiming that the Iranian government kidnapped their
relatives as they tried to escape Iran in 1994-97, Radio Farda
reported. One day later, a summons relating to the case was delivered
to Iran’s former president, Hojatoleslam Mohammad Khatami, at a
reception hosted by the Council on American-Islamic Relations in
Arlington, Virginia. The lawsuit alleges that Khatami’s policies
precluded a trial and these same policies prevented the provision of
information on those missing. One of the attorneys in the case, the
Los Angeles-based Pooya Dayanim, told Radio Farda that U.S. law
allows foreign victims of torture to file cases against the torturers
in U.S. federal courts. (Bill Samii)
IRAN SENDS MIXED MESSAGES ON URANIUM ENRICHMENT. After the second day
of talks in Vienna between Iranian Supreme National Security Council
Secretary Ali Larijani and EU High Representative for Common Foreign
and Security Policy Javier Solana, unnamed diplomats reportedly told
AP on September 10 that the two sides have reached a compromise in
which Tehran would suspend uranium enrichment for a month or two if
this can be portrayed in a face-saving way.
However, Iranian envoy to the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Ali Asqar Soltanieh said on state television on
September 10 that reports of a suspension are false. “Suspension, or
as some news agencies say, ‘a suspension for one or two
months,’ was not discussed in the talks and, based on my
information from the meeting, I denied this,” he said.
Aside from that seemingly significant discrepancy, both sides
were publicly enthusiastic about the discussions. RFE/RL quoted
Larijani as saying that “we have made constructive progress” and
adding: “We have reached common points of view on a number of issues
that we have. And, as was mentioned by Solana, many of the
misunderstandings were removed.” Solana described the “hours of work”
as “productive” and said some “misunderstandings” were “clarified.”
Solana said another meeting will follow within a week.
Alaedin Borujerdi, the head of the Iranian parliament’s
National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, told ISNA on
September 11 that talks between Larijani and Solana have shown that
“the only way to come out of the present situation is to negotiate,
and pressure on Iran” will not work. He said that in contrast to
previous talks, the latest talks were held “in a suitable
environment,” and focused on Iran’s response to a Western package
of proposals on its contested program “and questions” EU states have.
The two sides are set to continue talks, showing that EU states now
favor talking to Iran, Borujerdi said. He said that EU states have
concluded that “using political pressure and the [UN] Security
Council lever will lead nowhere,” ISNA reported. He accused the
United States of trying to block a negotiated solution to the issue.
U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton is a “radical, irrational
agent,” he said, working against talks, “and it was repeated in the
UN…that the draft of a second resolution [against Iran] is in
Bolton’s pocket.”
The governing board of the IAEA met in Vienna on September 13
to discuss Iran’s controversial nuclear program, RFE/RL’s
Radio Farda and news agencies reported. The board was to consider a
statement drawn up by France, Great Britain, and Germany mildly
critical of Iran’s failure to suspend nuclear fuel-making and
related activities in response to repeated Western requests, AP
reported. The text of the statement uses “toned-down” language that
will not jeopardize scheduled September 14 talks with Iran, AP quoted
unnamed diplomats as saying.
On September 13 in Vienna, U.S. envoy to the International
Atomic Energy Agency Gregory Schulte said Iran’s “refusal to
suspend” uranium enrichment and related activities that could one day
serve military purposes “and its refusal to cooperate is a choice of
confrontation over…negotiation,” AFP reported.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Husseini said in
Tehran on September 14 that “talks and negotiations are the only
solution” to the diplomatic impasse over Iran’s nuclear program,
ISNA reported. He accused the United States of “intensifying pressure
to damage the existing atmosphere and obstruct the current process of
talks.” The United States is using “threats and forcefulness to
pursue its unilateral aims,” and resorting to “blackmail by
publicity” to “infect” the atmosphere against Iran and “sidetrack”
talks, he said. Husseini said Iran and “the other parties” are trying
to “find a solution” through talks; he urged Washington “to be a
little patient” to “prove its sincerity in welcoming negotiations,”
ISNA reported.
Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh-Khoi, the head of Iran’s Atomic
Energy Organization, met on September 19 in Vienna with IAEA
Director-General Muhammad el-Baradei, state television and IRNA
reported. Aqazadeh said afterward that the IAEA does not appreciate
Iran’s extensive cooperation. Aqazadeh added that he briefed
el-Baradei on Iran’s talks on the nuclear issue with the EU’s
Javier Solana.
In New York on September 19, President Ahmadinejad criticized
the United Nations’ stance on the nuclear issue, state television
reported. “The UN approach toward global issues is an illogical one
which manifests itself in various forms in Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon,
and Sudan,” he said. “The UN behavior toward Iran’s nuclear
program is also another example of this unjust behavior which should
be corrected,” the president added.
Ahmadinejad again addressed the nuclear issue in a September
21 press conference. He dismissed international concern over
Iran’s nuclear program during his September 21 press conference,
and he ascribed this concern to alleged U.S. hostility and efforts to
retard Iran’s development, RFE/RL reported. “U.S. leaders have
opposed our nation for the past 27 years, they are against any
progress by our nation,” he claimed. “They imposed eight years of war
on us and the United States supported the aggressor [Iraq]. We
hadn’t done anything wrong, we had just been freed from a
dictator who was supported by America [a reference to the Iranian
monarch].”
According to Reuters, Ahmadinejad also said Iran is willing
to negotiate over the possibility if its suspending
uranium-enrichment activities, and he added that negotiations with
the European Union are going well. “We have said that under fair
conditions and just conditions we will negotiate about it,” he said.
(Bill Samii, Vahid Sepehri)
TOP SHI’ITE CLERIC CHALLENGES POPE TO DEBATE. The papal nuncio in
Tehran, Cardinal Angelo Michela, was summoned to the Iranian Foreign
Ministry on September 17 to hear Iran’s displeasure at remarks
made by Pope Benedict XVI in mid-September and interpreted as linking
Islam with violence, IRNA reported. A speech by the Roman Catholic
pontiff quoted 14th-century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II
Paleologus’s assertion that Islam brought the world only “evil
and inhuman” things, such as “the command to spread by the sword the
faith he preached.”
The director-general for Western Europe at the Iranian
Foreign Ministry, Ibrahim Rahimpur, told the cardinal, “We do not
expect the pope…to make comments one hears from [U.S. President]
Bush on the anniversary of the September 11” attacks, IRNA reported.
Rahimpur said the pontiff’s conduct belies his stated interest in
dialogue among religions, and complained that he had made an
“incomplete” reference to a historical discussion. Rahimpur wondered
aloud why Pope Benedict said nothing about the Persian scholar’s
reply to the controversial 14th-century quotation. “Clearly the
Islamic world collectively interprets the pope’s remarks as
insulting, and he must show more awareness of his religious and
political responsibility,” Rahimpur said.
Separately, Tehran’s Armenian bishop, Sabouh Sarkissian,
and Armenian members of Iran’s parliament on September 17
condemned the pope’s remarks, IRNA reported. Iranian seminaries
also closed down in protest at the remarks, RFE/RL’s Radio Farda
and AFP reported on September 17.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei criticized the pope in
a September 18 speech, state radio reported. Such comments result
from ignorance and are insulting, Khamenei said. Khamenei said these
statements are part of an effort to create crises and misrepresent
Muslims. “I think the pope himself has been deceived in this case,”
Khamenei added.
Grand Ayatollah Nasser Makarem-Shirazi on September 20
invited Pope Benedict XVI to a debate at any time or place, Fars News
Agency reported. “The hostile remarks made by the pope are a clear
example of the growing violence in the world,” Makarem-Shirazi said.
The Vatican issued several statements expressing “regret”
that Muslims found the speech offensive, and Pope Benedict on
September 20 stressed his “deep respect” for Islam and said the
“polemical nature” of the 14th-century emperor’s statement “does
not reflect my personal conviction.” (Vahid Sepehri, Bill Samii)
FOREIGN MINISTRY GETS NEW SPOKESMAN. Seyyed Mohammad-Ali Husseini was
named the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s new spokesman in a September
10 directive from Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki, Mehr News
Agency reported. Previously director of the Supervision and
Assessment Department in the Foreign Ministry, Husseini also has
served as charge d’affaires in Jordan, Syria, and Tajikistan. He
succeeds Hamid Reza Assefi, who has served as spokesman since 1999.
(Bill Samii)
IRAQI PRIME MINISTER VISITS IRAN. Nuri al-Maliki arrived in Tehran on
September 12, where he held an initial round of talks with President
Mahmud Ahmadinejad, ISNA and IRNA reported. Ahmadinejad said at a
press conference that Iran is ready to help with Iraqi reconstruction
and development, and specifically water-resources management, ISNA
reported. Ahmadinejad said a secure and independent Iraq will benefit
all regional states, and Iran will stand by its neighbor “to the
end…we support the popular government derived from the people’s
vote and the Iraqi Constitution,” IRNA reported.
The same day, Iranian Trade Minister Masud Mirkazemi met in
Tehran with trade and banking officials, the governors of four
provinces bordering Iraq, and Iran’s trade attache in Baghdad to
discuss ways of boosting exports to Iraq, IRNA reported. Mirkazemi
urged “cohesive, precise, and clear” policies to increase imports, a
coordinated trading policy for frontier provinces, and closer
controls over frontier markets, IRNA reported.
Al-Maliki met with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in
Tehran on September 13, receiving the cleric’s pledge that Iran
will give Iraq “practical support,” IRNA reported. Khamenei said the
“happiness and progress” of Iraqis constitutes the same for Iranians.
“The Islamic Republic…considers itself obliged to provide the Iraqi
people and government its practical support,” he said. He expressed
hope that the “daily suffering” of Iraqis, which he blamed “partly”
on the previous “diabolical regime” and partly on “the presence of
occupiers,” will end soon. “With the departure of the occupiers, many
of Iraq’s problems will be resolved,” Khamenei said.
Al-Maliki thanked Khamenei for Iran’s supportive stance,
and said, “the expansion of relations with friendly and neighborly
states is one of Iraq’s foreign-policy priorities,” IRNA
reported.
Al-Maliki met on September 13 with Expediency Council
Chairman Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani and Supreme National Security
Council Secretary Ali Larijani, ISNA reported. Rafsanjani told him it
is the “shortcomings” of the “occupying power” that are causing
instability in Iraq: “the people of Iraq can rely on internal
capabilities to resolve many problems.” He said Iranians will do
everything to help Iraq’s government restore security to the
land, but also help with reconstruction and development. “In suitable
conditions, Iranians can swiftly help so the problems of the Iraqi
people are resolved,” he said.
Larijani said separately that Iraq is Iran’s “natural
ally” and this alliance could take “evident” form now under
al-Maliki’s government. Iran’s “fixed policy,” he said, is to
help assure Iraq’s security and territorial integrity, ISNA
reported. (Vahid Sepehri)
IRANIAN, BRITISH CONSULATES ATTACKED IN IRAQ. The Iranian and British
consulates came under attack in separate incidents in the southern
Iraqi city of Al-Basrah on September 19, Al-Sharqiyah television
reported the same day. Police sources in the city said that two
rockets hit the outer wall of the Iranian Consulate, and a third
rocket landed on a nearby police car. A British military spokesman
said one mortar shell landed inside the consulate’s compound.
There were no apparent injuries in either attack. Police in Al-Basrah
said they arrested 130 suspected insurgents on September 19, dpa
reported on September 20. An unidentified police spokesman said the
arrests were part of a new security crackdown on the city. (Kathleen
Ridolfo)
IRAQ-BASED EX-MKO MEMBERS SEEK WESTERN ASYLUM. The new UN Human
Rights Council is meeting in Geneva for the next two weeks, and some
former members of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization gathered outside
the meeting place to demand that 160 other former members be given
refuge in the West, Radio Farda reported on September 18.
The Mujahedin Khalq Organization (commonly known as the MKO
or MEK, and which uses a variety of cover names including
People’s Mujahedin of Iran) is listed as a “foreign terrorist
organization” by the U.S. State Department. The MEK was based in Iraq
and operated against Iran at Saddam Hussein’s behest; many of its
members now reside in Camp Ashraf (100 kilometers from Baghdad) where
they enjoy the Geneva Convention’s “protected person” status, and
some members have returned to Iran voluntarily.
Milad Ariai, who left the MEK after 20 years, told Radio
Farda that many of the 160 asylum seekers are citizens of Western
countries. Because the MEK is regarded as a terrorist organization by
many countries, he continued, the former members are having problems
going to the West. (Bill Samii)
DAMASCUS RECEIVES IRANIAN SECURITY OFFICIAL. Supreme National
Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani arrived in Damascus on
September 20 for a one-day visit, SANA reported. Larijani met with
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Vice President Faruq
al-Shar’a, and topics of discussion reportedly included the
international standoff over the Iranian nuclear program, Iraq,
Lebanon, and Palestine. (Bill Samii)
INSURGENTS IN SOUTHEAST IRAN REPORTEDLY HALTED. South Khorasan
Governor-General Seyyed Solat Mortazavi told a September 10 meeting
of provincial officials in the provincial capital of Birjand that the
actions of Baluchi insurgents led by Abdulmalik Rigi have been
stopped, Mehr News Agency reported. “With the grace of God and owing
to an unprecedented action, all active members of the Rigi revolt
have been arrested and full security has been [restored] in eastern
Iran,” he said.
Rigi’s group, called Jundullah, was blamed for a March 16
attack on a motorcade traveling between the cities of Zahedan and
Zabol in which more than 20 people were killed and seven others
injured; in early April, it released a videotape in which it claimed
to have killed an officer in the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (see
“RFE/RL Iran Report,” March 29 and April 18, 2006).
Mortazavi attributed the actions of Jundullah to foreign
powers, saying, “The arrogant powers, bent on undermining the
security of the Islamic republic, seek to exacerbate ethnic and
tribal differences and in so doing commit all sorts of crimes by
using operatives like Rigi.” (Bill Samii)
MAN ARRESTED FOR PROTESTING DEATHS OF POLITICAL PRISONERS. Fazael
Azizan was detained by Iranian authorities on September 18, Radio
Farda reported on September 20. Azizan was protesting outside the
Ardabil provincial governorate against the mysterious deaths of
political prisoners Akbar Mohammadi and Valiollah Feyz-Mahdavi.
Talash Kobra Ghorbanzadeh, Azizan’s wife, told Radio Farda that
her husband is in solitary confinement and has launched a hunger
strike. Ghorbanzadeh said she was taken to see a prosecutor who asked
about Azizan’s associates and wanted to know who was behind his
protest. Ghorbanzadeh reportedly responded that Azizan acted of his
own accord but said the judge was not convinced. If Ghorbanzadeh does
not cooperate, she said the prosecutor warned, her husband could be
subjected to harsh measures. (Bill Samii)
REFORMIST DAILY CLOSED. “Sharq,” one of Iran’s prominent
reformist dailies, was ordered temporarily closed by the Press
Supervisory Board for an allegedly insulting cartoon and editorial
discrepancies, RFE/RL’s Radio Farda and local media reported on
September 12. The board ordered the closure because the license
holder failed to name a new editor who would have “greater
supervision” of the daily’s contents, as the board had earlier
asked.
It also deplored an offensive cartoon published on September
7, interpreted as a reference to President Ahmadinejad. The cartoon
reportedly depicted a donkey surrounded by a halo; Ahmadinejad has
claimed that light surrounded him when he spoke once to the UN
General Assembly in September 2005.
Exiled cartoonist Nikahang Kosar told Radio Farda on
September 12 that the system in Iran effectively obliges “legal
mechanisms” to take action whenever any “small group” of people which
he said are regime insiders find an article or cartoon offensive.
Journalist Mashallah Shamsolvaezin told Radio Farda on
September 11 that the government and Press Supervisory Board are
violating press laws, and there is no legal basis for banning the
daily.
Editors and managers of several “nongovernmental” dailies met
with Expediency Council Chairman Ayatollah Ali Akbar
Hashemi-Rafsanjani in Tehran on September 13, and heard his views on
responsible reporting. He said newspapers are a “strategic” necessity
in Iran, but need to respect truthful reporting and consider state
interests, IRNA reported. Rafsanjani said “supra-legal restrictions
on the press go against the interests of the revolution and country,”
and it is “practically impossible” to block the news in a “global
village” and amid an “information explosion.” But he urged the press
to “respect the interests of the people, regime, and country, and
commit themselves to reporting realities and respecting” their
“professional principles.” He deplored the “bad tradition” of
“insults and calumny” against politicians, “especially at elections,”
IRNA reported. (Vahid Sepehri)
DISSIDENT’S LAWYER FACES COURT ACTION. Khalil Bahramian, a lawyer
defending a student activist who died in Tehran’s Evin prison in
late July, is now charged with “insulting the system,” apparently for
remarks he made after his client Akbar Mohammadi’s death (see
“RFE/RL Iran Report,” August 10, 2006), RFE/RL’s Radio Farda
reported on September 11. Bahramian told the broadcaster that Evin
prison authorities are taking legal action after unspecified comments
he made on the constitutional rights of citizens and inmates. He said
he has already attended one session in which he explained his
statements to interrogators.
Separately, judiciary chief Ayatollah Mahmud Hashemi-Shahrudi
told a gathering of judiciary officials in Tehran on September 11
that Iranian judges give out too many jail sentences, a practice he
said is inspired by Western systems and against Islamic legal
principles, Mehr reported. He said laws should be changed to allow
judges to order the conditional release of many more inmates who have
completed half their sentences, after due consideration. Prison, he
said, is not “the solution or treatment for crimes” and “the basis of
imprisonment as a penalty…must change, and substitute penalties
should be used,” Mehr reported. VS
CONCERNS PERSIST ON STATE OF PRISONERS. Relatives have expressed
concern about the condition of two detainees, former legislator Ali
Akbar Musavi-Khoeini and former student Ahmad Batebi, “Aftab-i Yazd”
reported on September 12, citing Iranian agencies. Tehran Province
prison chief Sohrab Suleimani told ISNA on September 11 that Batebi
enjoys a “suitable physical state” and is currently in Evin prison.
Batebi’s father says he has not seen him on a list of Evin
prisoners.
Suleimani added that another detainee, Valiollah Feyz
Mahdavi, died in prison recently “after hanging himself in the prison
bathroom.” In spite of “security elements, sometimes there are
suicides in prison,” Suleimani said, “and we do everything to
minimize cases of such deaths,” ISNA reported. The suicide version of
his death is disputed.
Separately, Zohreh Islami, Musavi-Khoeini’s wife, told
the Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) on September 11 that she spoke
by phone to her husband once in the last seven days, but has been
prevented from visiting. She said he has been under arrest “for 92
days” and the judiciary has rejected his lawyer’s request for a
meeting with Musavi-Khoeini or his release on bail, ILNA reported. VS
ACTIVIST SAYS FEMALE ADDICTS, PROSTITUTES PROLIFERATING IN CITIES.
There is a rising number of “abused” women turning to drugs and
prostitution in Iran, and this is becoming a grave problem in cities,
RFE/RL’s Radio Farda reported on September 14, citing rights
activist Mehrangiz Kar. She said more women she termed “vulnerable”
for their precarious financial conditions and difficult home
conditions are turning to drugs and prostitution, and at an
increasingly young age. They can expect very little support from the
government or society, she added. She cited a recent report in which
a woman staying at a state shelter or health-care facility killed her
“illegitimate” child to rid herself of the “shame.” Kar said some
social workers chide the women in their care for their lifestyles and
help bring about such crimes. Kar said the woman told the health-care
worker that by killing her child she “wiped away the stain of shame
and sent it to God.” Kar said this statement effectively “put the
government, society, and even social workers on trial.” She urged the
government to provide job training for such girls. VS
IRAN PREPARES FOR ‘SACRED DEFENSE WEEK.’ Defense and Armed
Forces Logistics Minister Mustafa Mohammad Najjar announced on
September 18 that several defense projects will commence in the
coming days, Fars News Agency reported. Iran marks the annual “Sacred
Defense Week” — the commemoration of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War — in
late September. Najjar said some of the MODAFL’s new products
will be displayed during a September 22 parade.
Also on September 18, Admiral Sajjad Kuchaki, commander of
the Iranian navy, announced domestic manufacturing of the Joshan
missile boat, state radio reported. He also introduced the
76-millimeter Fajr gun that can be used against surface vessels at a
range of 16 kilometers or aerial targets at altitudes up to around
7,000 meters. The gun’s rate of fire can vary from 10 rounds per
minute to 85 per minute. (Bill Samii)
IRAN READIES FOR HOLY MONTH OF RAMADAN. Mohammad Reza Shafei, the
Agricultural Jihad Ministry’s director-general for domestic
commerce, announced on September 21 that red meat and chicken will be
distributed at lowered prices in the coming month, IRNA reported. The
holy month of Ramadan is expected to begin on September 23 or 24, and
it will conclude with the festival of Eid al-Fitr. During Ramadan,
devout Muslims fast during daylight hours and consume meals only
during the night. Shafei said 10,000 tons of frozen chicken will be
distributed and consumers will face only a 400-rial-per-kilogram
markup. The ministry is considering the distribution of 20,000 tons
of red meat, and possibly an additional 12,000 tons of imported red
meat. (Bill Samii)
EARLY RACE FOR CLERICAL ASSEMBLY GETS BITTER. Early competition to
head the Assembly of Experts, the influential assembly that oversees
the work of the supreme leader, pits a pragmatic former president
against a fundamentalist seminarian with close ties to the current
president. Another possible choice, ex-president and reformist
Hojatoleslam Mohammad Khatami, lies somewhere in the middle.
The race could have serious long-term implications —
particularly for would-be reformers.
The Assembly of Experts is a powerful institution whose 86
clerics’ supervisory role includes the power to remove Iran’s
supreme leader from office. The fact that its members are popularly
elected every eight years highlights the significance of the decision
that faces voters in the December 15 ballot.
One of the most controversial aspects of this election is the
competition for the assembly’s leadership.
Reluctant Candidate?
Ex-President Ali-Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, already a deputy
speaker of the assembly, is largely backed by reformists, centrists,
and mainstream conservatives. Leading figures in a conservative
clergymen’s association, the Tehran Militant Clergy Association
(Jameh-yi Ruhaniyat-i Mobarez-i Tehran), visited Hashemi-Rafsanjani
in mid-September to encourage his candidacy. One of those clerics,
Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Mahdavi-Kani, advised Hashemi-Rafsanjani that
he is “still one of the principal mainstays of the system and
leadership,” the Aref website reported on September 19. He said such
status carries a responsibility to “stand and serve the system at
sensitive junctures.”
Hashemi-Rafsanjani is a seasoned politician who served as
president for two terms in 1989-97, was a legislator, and currently
heads the Expediency Council. He reportedly told the clergymen’s
group that his participation is unnecessary and would make no real
difference. He said he was already being criticized, and he pointed
to his unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2005, which included
personal attacks against him and his family. Similar attacks — many
of them centered on allegations of financial corruption — have
continued against Hashemi-Rafsanjani’s associates. They smack of
an effort to weaken the informal network through which he wields his
considerable influence.
The ‘Crocodile’
The man whom many view as Hashemi-Rafsanjani’s likely
rival is Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi. Mesbah-Yazdi is
punningly referred to by detractors as “Ayatollah Crocodile”
(“Temsah”) due to his hard-line views. He is current President Mahmud
Ahmadinejad’s spiritual guide and a founder of the conservative
Haqqani seminary, with numerous associates in the executive branch of
government.
Two Haqqani alumni serve in the current cabinet —
Intelligence and Security Minister Hojatoleslam Gholam-Hussein
Mohseni-Ejei and Interior Minister Hojatoleslam Mustafa
Pur-Mohammadi. Mesbah-Yazdi now heads the Imam Khomeini Educational
and Research Institute, and several of its associates now work in the
executive branch, including government spokesman Gholam Hussein
Elham, First Vice President Parviz Davudi, and presidential adviser
for clerical affairs Hojatoleslam Mohammad Nasser Saqa-yi Biria.
A conservative weekly associated with Mesbah-Yazdi, “Parto-i
Sokhan” from Qom, has published a number of attacks on
Hashemi-Rafsanjani. A lengthy piece on August 23 purports to be
seminarians’ response to a letter from Hashemi-Rafsanjani. The
ex-president is portrayed as questioning Iran’s theocratic system
and employing “distorted and truncated quotes” from the founder of
the revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, to substantiate his
views. The article goes on to imply that Hashemi-Rafsanjani has
comforted Iran’s enemies by voicing support for a Leadership
Council to replace the current figure of the supreme leader.
The same article suggests that allies of Britain sought to
pass a constitutional amendment that would have extended
Hashemi-Rafsanjani’s term as president beyond 1997. It also
condemns his failure to call for the death of a scholar who
criticized the clergy in 2003 and his support for women’s rights.
The article goes on to attack the think tank associated with the
Expediency Council, the Strategic Research Center, which includes
perceived reformers on its staff like former President Khatami and
former Supreme National Security Council Secretary Hojatoleslam
Hassan Rohani.
Occasional hints of reconciliation between the hard-line
Mesbah-Yazdi and Hashemi-Rafsanjani generally prove not to be true.
The two reportedly bumped into each other at recent meeting of the
Assembly of Experts and had what one observer described as a “very
friendly and warm encounter,” “Sharq” reported on September 4. The
hard-liner was quoted as saying he has “no blood feud with anyone”
and stressing his long friendship with Hashemi-Rafsanjani. But he
reportedly rushed to add that he and Hashemi-Rafsanjani “differ…on
certain issues” and that their “religious responsibility” dictates
that “friendship will play no role.”
Pro-reform activists have reacted to fundamentalist attacks
against their favorites in many ways — including downplaying
Mesbah-Yazdi’s prerevolutionary activities against the shah. He
also has been linked with a banned millennialist entity, the
Hojjatieh Society.
A former interior minister and legislator better-known for
his role in establishing the Lebanese Hizballah in the 1980s,
Hojatoleslam Ali Akbar Mohtashami-Pur, recently likened
Mesbah-Yazdi’s followers to the Hojjatieh Society — calling them
“a movement within an organized cult…[that seeks] control of the
Assembly of Experts,” “Aftab-i Yazd” quoted him on August 26 as
saying. Mohtashami-Pur warned that “a movement that thinks like the
Hojjatieh always poses a danger to the people and the system.”
Reformist Target
The fundamentalists are attacking other prospective leaders
in the Assembly of Experts, too. One of their apparent targets is a
symbol of the reformist movement, former President Khatami
(1997-2005). A reformist party leader, National Trust Party head
Ebrahim Amini, accused Khatami’s opponents of “trying by various
means to create doubt in public opinion about the positions of the
reformists,” “Aftab-i Yazd” reported on September 16. He accused
those same elements of resorting to “character assassination.”
A leading figure from the center of the political spectrum,
senior Executives of Construction Party member Mohammad Hashemi,
echoed that accusation, “Aftab-i Yazd” reported on September 16. He
said the bullying began after the 2000 parliamentary elections and
has “gradually turned into an unethical tradition” through which
fundamentalists stopped pressing solutions and started relying solely
on political attacks on their opponents.
The most vicious recent attacks on Khatami have come from
Fatemeh Rajabi, the wife of government spokesman Gholam Hussein Elham
and the head of the “Nosazi” website. In an open letter published in
“Etemad-i Melli” on September 4, Rajabi suggested that a U.S. visa
for Khatami’s recent trip to the United States is his “reward for
eight years of efforts from the Americans, and especially from .the
Black House.”
Rajabi attacked Khatami’s “presence and parading in
America’s cities” and disparaged his views on “modern Islam” She
accused Iran’s most prominent proponent of reform of distorting
religion — calling Khatami’s Islam “the Islam of a life of
pleasure, the Islam of doing business, the Islam of aristocracy, the
Islam of seeking comfort, the Islam of seeking welfare, and in a
word: American Islam.” She called it “a lame excuse for someone who
is dressed as Shi’ite clergy?”
Criticized by reformists and by conservatives, and her
brother, Mohammad Hassan Rajabi, according to “Kargozaran” on August
1, Rajabi lashed out again. She said Khatami’s ascribing of the
2001 terrorist attacks on the United States to Muslims “delivered a
major blow against Islam.” She suggested that recent remarks by Pope
Benedict XVI that elicited widespread condemnation among Muslims were
“a natural echo of Khatami’s remarks,” “Aftab” reported on
September 17.
Strong-Armed Conservatives
The role of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) could
further cloud prospects for potential rivals to any but the most
conservative candidates. The IRGC was accused of interfering in the
2003 municipal elections on behalf of fundamentalists. The Basij, a
branch of the IRGC, was accused after the 2005 presidential election
of having behaved like a political party.
Such allegations coincide with accusations of Guards Corps
political activism that are either denied or refuted with references
to Article 150 of the Iranian Constitution that tasks the IRGC with
defending the revolution and its achievements.
Recent statements by Guards Corps leaders are consistent with
a pattern favoring the hard-liners. The chief of the IRGC joint
staff, General Yadollah Javani, told a meeting of corps commanders
that there are major political movements involved in the upcoming
elections that have different interpretations of Iran’s
theocratic system (vilayat-i faqih), “Hemayat” reported on September
10. He characterized opponents as believing that the popular vote
legitimizes the system and that the theocracy’s responsibility is
satisfying the people. That movement is opposed by those who — like
revolutionary founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and presumably,
himself — believe God legitimizes the vilayat-i faqih system. Javani
went on to say that the reformists are intent on returning to power,
and they are trying to create divisions among fundamentalists.
The supreme leader’s representative in the IRGC
counterintelligence department, Hojatoleslam Ahmad Salek, sounded a
more ominous alarm. He warned that there is an effort afoot to
undermine the vilayat-i faqih, “Kayhan” reported on September 17. He
alleged that an unidentified five-member committee is trying to
“infiltrate” individuals into the Assembly of Experts “in order to
create deviations in that institution.” He said their goal is to
“bring about the disintegration and collapse of the Islamic political
system.”
Are The Reformers Ready?
Pro-reform parties are not standing by idly. They are trying
to form a coalition to compete with the fundamentalists. “Aftab-i
Yazd” on September 16 quoted Mohammad Salamati of the Mujahedin of
the Islamic Revolution Organization as saying the reformist coalition
has been finalized.
But there also are questions about a draft election law that
many observers fear would extend the hard-liners’ considerable
ability to restrict candidates for elected office. A former interior
minister, Hojatoleslam Abdolvahed Musavi-Lari, noted that the group
conducting the election — the Interior Ministry — is from the same
political camp as the Guardians Council, which is supervising the
election, “Aftab-i Yazd” reported on August 14.
Musavi-Lari noted that the Guardians Council’s power to
vet candidates represents reformists’ “main concern,” since that
body can decide “whether or not they will be allowed to remain on the
scene.”
The Assembly of Experts held its semi-annual meeting on
August 29-30. Little information emerges from those closed-door
affairs — highlighted by the fact that final statements are
remarkably similar from year to year.
But as the current group prepares to give way to a new
Assembly of Experts, it appears that a fundamentalist victory would
cement the hold of President Ahmadinejad’s allies over all
elected branches of government. On the other hand, reformist gains
would signal that a group that has been in disarray since 2003 has
returned to the political fray — and is not completely marginalized.
(Bill Samii)
****************************************** ***************
Copyright (c) 2006. RFE/RL, Inc. All rights reserved.
The “RFE/RL Iran Report” is a weekly prepared by A. William Samii on
the basis of materials from RFE/RL broadcast services, RFE/RL
Newsline, and other news services. It is distributed every Monday.
Direct comments to A. William Samii at [email protected].
For information on reprints, see:
p
Back issues are online at

EUROPEAN ARMENIAN FEDERATION
for Justice and Democracy
Avenue de la Renaissance 10
B-1000 Bruxelles
Tel: +322 732 70 26
Tel/Fax: +322 732 70 27
Email: [email protected]
PRESS RELEASE
September 25, 2006
Contact: Vartenie ECHO
Tel: +322 732 70 26
THE EUROPEAN ARMENIAN FEDERATION DENOUNCES THE TURKISH PRESSURE ON THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
– The Socialist and Liberal groups demand to suppress the paragraph on
the recognition of the Armenian Genocide as a precondition to the
adhesion of Turkey.
– Under the pressure exercised by Turkey, the Socialist and Liberal
groups – while being the two principal promoters of the paragraph in
question during the vote of September 4 in the Committee on Foreign
Affairs – have performed an about turn by submitting an amendment
which aims to suppress the precondition. These amendments do not enjoy
the unanimity of their groups.
`Turkey has imposed these amendments by intimidating certain members
of the two groups. Several parliamentarians close to the file have
even been personally threatened’ declared Hilda Tchoboian, the
president of the European Armenian Federation.
`Turkey, while not in Europe, is attempting to revert and direct the
political line of our European representatives and is imposing its
denial. The recognition of the genocide as a precondition to the
adhesion was adopted in the same terms in the resolution of September
2005. We warn against this risky strategy which will offend the
European nations in order `not to offend’ a state which is
definitively negationist’ concluded Hilda Tchoboian.
#######

CDA too removes candidates because of Armenia-standpoint
De Telegraaf (Dutch national newspaper)
26 September, 2006, 22:27
THE HAGUE – After the PvdA (Labor Party), the administration of the CDA
(Christian Democrats) decided on Tuesday to remove candidates from their
list for the Parliamentary elections on November 22, because of
controversial standpoints on the genocide in Armenia.
It concerns the CDA members Ayhan Tonca (35th on the list) and Osman Elmaci
(56th) who were called to attention because they do not recognize the
genocide in Armenia in 1915. Last Friday, the two had made a statement that
they do recognize the genocide.
Nevertheless, after a meeting with the daily administration of the CDA
Tuesday evening, the party decided to remove the two from the list.
The party administration of the PvdA decided Tuesday to remove Erdinc Sacan
(number 53 on the list) because he does not recognize the genocide.
CDA and PvdA feel that it is of great importance that the candidates
underline the faction’s standpoint. In 2004, on the initiative of the
ChristenUnie, the Parliament unanimously agreed that the government should
continuously raise the issue of the Armenian genocide in its negotiations
with Turkey in the framework of Turkey’s accession to the European Union.

Turkish CDA members gone due to Armenia-row
NOS (Dutch news agency)
26 September 2006
The Turkish CDA (Christian Democrats) members Tonca and Elmaci are no longer
candidate MPs. The CDA decided to remove them from the list after commotion
over the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
Tonca and Elmaci have continuously denied that Turks committed genocide
against the Armenians in 1915. As candidate MPs, they subscribed this week
to the CDA’s standpoint that a genocide was committed. Today, they
nevertheless took those words back in a Turkish newspaper.
Earlier, the PvdA (Labor Party) administration removed Erdinc Sacan from the
candidate’s list. He did not subscribe to the PvdA’s standpoint on the
genocide by Turks.