VimpelCom inks deal to buy Armenia’ ArmenTel for 342 mln euro
Prime-Tass English-language Business Newswire
November 3, 2006 Friday 6:50 PM EET
Russia’s second largest mobile operator VimpelCom has signed an
agreement to acquire a 90% stake in ArmenTel, the incumbent telecoms
operator in Armenia, from Greece’s Hellenic Telecommunications
Organization SA (OTE) for 341.9 million euros, VimpelCom said in a
press release Friday.
In addition, VimpelCom agreed to assume ArmenTel’s debt of
approximately 40 million euros, the Russian operator said.
The deal is subject to certain conditions, including approval by the
government of Armenia, VimpelCom said.
OTE earlier announced a tender for its 90% stake in ArmenTel.
Besides VimpelCom, Russian holding AFK Sistema, a consortium from
the United Arab Emirates (UAE) including telecom company Etisalat
and investment fund Istithmar, and a consortium of VTEL Holdings and
Knightsbridge Associates have participated in the tender.
ArmenTel is a fixed-line and mobile operator in Armenia with licenses
in the GSM 900 and CDMA standards. ArmenTel’s subscriber base
includes approximately 600,000 fixed-line subscribers and 400,000
GSM subscribers.
Armenia’s population is about 3.2 million people.
VimpelCom operates in Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan and plans to launch services in Georgia soon.

Haykakan Zhamanak, Yerevan,
1 Nov 2006 p 3
PAPER REPORTS RIFT BETWEEN ARMENIAN FUND, KARABAKH LEADERSHIP
by Kristine Khanumyan’s
“The rift between the foundation and the NKR is widening”
The rift is widening between the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund [HAAF]
and the NKR [Nagornyy Karabakh Republic]. The reason is the low
quality of the North-South road [in Nagornyy Karabakh funded by the
HAAF]. Lots of complaints are coming from Karabakh. Both the HAAF and
the NKR authorities, which are responsible for the quality of the road,
point at each other. That is to say, both are trying to get away with
murder and leave the Karabakh residents face-to-face with the problem.
The HAAF is trying to hold the NKR authorities responsible for
everything. At a recent news conference, the executive director of the
HAAF [and former NKR foreign minister], Naira Melkumyan, said that they
were not responsible for the roads whose guarantee had expired. She
also made one more interesting statement. She said that before 2005
there was no word about the low quality of the North-South road
(although those sectors of the road were put into operation earlier)
but that statements were made later saying that the roads had been
in bad repair since 2004.
As a result, the problem was discussed at the trustees’ council after
which the president of the trustees’ council, [Armenian President]
Robert Kocharyan, said that the cases of the companies which carried
out low-quality work should be referred to the prosecutor’s office.
In brief, Kocharyan “gave his approval” for the sending of the cases
of several persons close to Gukasyan to the prosecutor’s office. But
until today no action has been taken against companies such as Vrezh or
Chanshin although their cases were sent to the prosecutor’s office in
May, but this could be predicted. A few days ago the HAAF was asked
to submit some clarifying papers.
This time round a tougher approach has been taken towards the
programmes implemented by the HAAF in Karabakh, in particular the
asphalting of the roads was considered to be of poor quality.
Melkumyan said that she did not agree with this assessment and asked
who could assess the quality of asphalt. We should tell the HAAF
leadership that the dean of the architecture department of the State
University of Architecture, Artur Tovmasyan, is the person.

ARMENIAN POLLS SHOW VARYING PUBLIC OPINION TO PRESSING ISSUES
Mediamax News Agency, Armenia
Nov 3 2006
The results of an opinion poll carried out by the Baltic Surveys/
The Gallup Organization among 1,200 Armenian residents from 31 July
to 10 August on order of the US International Republican Institute
(IRI) were made public this week, Mediamax has said. The first opinion
poll was carried out by the Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization
in Armenia in May 2006. The aim of the opinion pools were to compare
their findings and determine differences in public opinion regarding
to foreign policy issues and the Karabakh conflict. The following is
an excerpt from report entitled “Foreign policy preferences of the
Armenian residents” in Russian, published by Armenian news agency
Mediamax; subheadings as published:
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict
A total of 75 per cent of Armenians polled in August and 75 per cent
in May said they considered the swift settlement of the Nagornyy
Karabakh problem “very important”. This stability shows that despite
statements made in Armenia from time to time that the preservation
of the existing status-quo is in favour of Armenia, the overwhelming
majority of the country’s residents believe that the non-settlement
of the conflict dissembles a myriad of threats. Anyway, like in May,
only two per cent of the respondents said that a quick settlement of
the Karabakh problem was “not very important”.
There were no significant changes in the views of Armenia’s residents
on ways of settling the conflict. A total of 39 per cent of those
polled in August consider that Nagornyy Karabakh should be an ordinary
region of Armenia without the right to an autonomy. In May, 41 per
cent of those polled supported this opinion. Some 27 per cent of the
respondents of the second survey said that Nagornyy Karabakh should
become an autonomy under Armenia. In spring, 31 per cent of the polled
supported this option.
Thirty-three per cent of respondents polled in August consider that
Nagornyy Karabakh should become an independent state. In May, 27 per
cent supported this idea.
None of the respondents in the both surveys supported the idea of
Nagornyy Karabakh being part of Azerbaijan.
The overwhelming majority of Armenian residents believe that the
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict should be resolved peacefully. In August,
82 per cent of the polled supported a peaceful settlement to the
conflict, in May, this totalled 85 per cent.
Relations with Russia
Over 90 per cent of the respondents in both opinion polls answered
positively to the question of “Do you think Russia is a reliable ally
of Armenia?”. In August, 46 per cent of the polled answered “yes”
to this question, in May 45 per cent. A total of 44 per cent of the
polled in August answered “probably, yes”. This was 42 per cent in May.
Answers of Armenia’s residents to the question of “Does the presence
of Russian military bases in Armenia have a positive or negative
influence on Armenia’s independence and stability in the country?”
was interesting.
Sixty-seven per cent of the polled in August consider this influence
positive, but this figure was 66 per cent in May. Two per cent of
those polled gave a negative assessment. Not least significance were
answers of those who found it difficult to give definite answers.
Some 15 per cent of those polled in August consider that the presence
of the Russian military bases in Armenia has neither positive nor
negative influence on Armenia’s independence (16 per cent in May),
and 12 per cent consider that the military bases have both positive
and negative influence (11 per cent in May)
Relations with NATO and European Union
The number of supporters of Armenia’s joining NATO have increased
by two per cent as compared to the survey carried out in May,
and amounted to 42 per cent. If in May, the number of supporters of
Armenia’s membership of NATO was 10 per cent of the polled, in August,
this number dropped and totalled 7 per cent. Instead, the number of
respondents who do not rule out the possibility of Armenia’s membership
of NATO in future increased from 30 to 35 per cent.
It is interesting that the number of strong opponents of Armenia’s
membership of the North Atlantic Alliance dropped considerably. In
May this number was 17 per cent but in August this number decreased
almost twice, and amounted to 9 per cent.
The number of supporters of Armenia’s joining the EU grow steadily.
In May 80 per cent of the polled were in favour of Armenia’s joining
the EU, in August, this number reached 84 per cent.
Iran’s nuclear programme
In May, 56 per cent of the polled in Armenia supported efforts of the
USA, the EU and Russia to prevent Iran from its aspiration to possess
nuclear weapons. In August, the number of those polled increased
by 65 per cent. In May, 11 per cent of the polled were against the
international efforts concerning Iran, in August, this number fell
7 per cent.

Freedom of speech regresses in Turkey, rights group says
Agence France Presse — English
November 3, 2006 Friday 5:43 PM GMT
Freedom of speech deteriorated in Turkey, a European Union candidate
nation, in the first nine months of this year compared with 2005,
the country’s main human rights watchdog said Friday.
The assessment came days before the European Commission — the EU’s
executive arm — issues what is expected to be a critical report on
Ankara’s progress towards membership.
“There has been no improvement with respect to basic rights and
liberties in the first nine months of 2006. In fact, there has been
deterioration in some areas such as freedom of expression,” Yusuf
Alatas, chairman of the Turkish Human Rights Association (IHD) told
a news conference here.
An IHD report showed 261 people indicted for expressing their opinions,
up from 192 charged in the whole of last year.
Courts had sentenced 134 people by the end of September this year
while 59 people were convicted in 2005.
Turkey’s obligation to guarantee freedom of expression is expected to
figure high in the European Commission report to be released Wednesday.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn has for months called for the
modification or scrapping of Article 301 of Turkey’s penal code to
guarantee freedom of speech.
Dozens of intellectuals, among them 2006 Nobel literature laureate
Orhan Pamuk, have been brought to court under the article mainly for
contesting the official line on the World War I massacres of Armenians
which Ankara rejects as constituting genocide.
Article 301 envisages up to three years in jail “for denigrating
Turkish national identity” and insulting state institutions.
No one has yet been imprisoned under the provision, but the appeals
court in July confirmed the suspended six-month sentence of a
Turkish-Armenian journalist, setting a precedent for pending cases
against some 70 intellectuals.
Thomas Hammerberg, the Council of Europe’s commissioner for Human
Rights, said here Friday that he had received a pledge from Turkish
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul that Ankara would take steps very soon
to rectify the situation.
“I was informed at the highest level that mistakes have been made
in the implementation of Article 301 and that these mistakes of
implementation will be corrected,” Hammarberg told a news conference
after three days of talks with Turkish officials.
“I welcome the message I got that this will end soon,” he said.
Hammarberg added that Gul had not specified how the government would
tackle the thorny issue.
The Turkish government has so far refrained from openly committing
itself to making a move on the controversial article, but has said
it was open to proposals to amend it.
The European Commission report is also expected to criticize the
slowing pace of reforms aimed at easing Turkey’s entry to the
25-nation bloc and its failure to honour its obligations to Cyprus
under a customs union agrement.
Turkey began membership talks with the European Union last year amid
warnings that the country still has much to do to prove its full
commitment to democracy and human rights.

Russia’s VimpelCom agrees deal to buy Armenian telecom group
Agence France Presse — English
November 3, 2006 Friday
Russian telecommunications group VimpelCom said Friday it had concluded
a deal to buy 90 percent of Armenian operator Armentel for 341.9
million euros (434.4 million dollars).
The Russian group is to buy the stake in Armentel, which controls
40 percent of the mobile market in Armenia, from semi-public Greek
company Hellenic Telecommunications Organization.
“We are pleased to announce the signing of this agreement that
will enable our entry into Armenia,” said VimpelCom chief executive
Alexander Izosimov.
VimpelCom has mobile phone operations throughout Russia and Kazakhstan
and has recently acquired mobile operators in Ukraine, Tajikistan,
Uzbekistan, and Georgia.
The group is quoted on the New York and Moscow stock exchanges and
counts Norwegian telecoms group Telenor as its biggest shareholder
with a 29.9-percent holding. Russian holding company Alfa Group owns
24.5 percent.
Armentel has 400,000 mobile phone subscribers and 600,000 fixed
line users.
VimpelCom said it would complete the purchase once “certain conditions”
were fulfilled, including approval by the Armenian government.

Some of the major points of tension between Turkey and the European Union
Associated Press Worldstream
November 3, 2006 Friday 6:01 PM GMT
CYPRUS
EU: Turkey must open its ports and airspace to Greek Cypriot ships
and recognize Cyprus’ customs union with the EU.
Turkey: Before it recognizes the government of Greek Cyprus, the EU
must keep its promise to help lift the international isolation of
the Turkish side of the divided island.
FREE SPEECH:
EU: Turkey must amend or abolish an article in the Turkish penal code
that makes it a crime to “insult Turkishness” and which is frequently
used to try academics and authors, notably Orhan Pamuk, this year’s
Nobel literature laureate.
Turkey: No one has gone to jail for expressing opinions so far,
and the problem is not with the article itself but with its
implementation. More time is needed.
HUMAN RIGHTS:
EU: Turkey is regressing after years of steady improvement.
Turkey: Rights have been strengthened and laws overhauled even
as Turkey deals with resurgent violence by Kurdish separatists,
considered terrorists by the United States and the EU.
WOMEN, MINORITIES:
EU: Expand their rights.
Turkey: It takes time to modernize a largely conservative Islamic
society, and granting greater rights to minorities particularly Kurds
could threaten the unity of the state.
ARMENIANS:
The EU: Turkey must recognize that the killing of as many as 1.5
million of its Armenian minority around the time of World War I
was genocide.
Turkey: Calling it genocide is “an international lie”; they died in
interethnic fighting as the Ottoman Empire collapsed.

Turkey and the EU drifting apart over membership bid
By BENJAMIN HARVEY, Associated Press Writer
Associated Press Worldstream
November 3, 2006 Friday 4:46 PM GMT
The cautious courtship between Turkey and the European Union looks
increasingly like it might be headed for a messy and acrimonious
breakup.
They were a mismatched couple from the beginning: one wealthy, mostly
Christian and liberal, the other far poorer, overwhelmingly Muslim
and largely conservative. Perhaps it’s no surprise that over time the
mood has deteriorated from buoyant optimism to mutual recriminations
and a seemingly hopeless inability to communicate.
The mood is likely to get noticeably worse after next Wednesday,
when the EU releases a progress report that sizes Turkey up. The
Associated Press saw a draft Friday that said Turkey is dragging its
feet on reform and failing to meet minimum human rights standards.
The consequences of further worsening of relations between Turkey and
the EU could be dramatic and far-reaching: At stake is an ambitious
vision of bringing a Muslim nation into the fold of liberal European
society, proving that a “clash of civilizations” between the West
and Islam is not inevitable.
Many analysts say that’s why the two parties are likely to continue
talking for the foreseeable future, never committing to a clean split
which would deliver the message to Muslims everywhere that the West
is not prepared to deal with them on equal footing.
“Of course I support the EU (bid),” said Bayram Kapici, a 38-year-old
security guard. “But the question is, what will our place in the EU
be? I mean, we’re Muslims. Are we barbarians? How will they see us?”
For the moment, enthusiasm toward Turkey’s bid has cooled dramatically
on both sides, and Turkish leaders’ passionate claims that an
“alliance of civilizations” can replace the much-feared “clash”
are starting to ring hollow.
Turkish public support for membership in the EU has fallen to below
50 percent, and many believe that perceived insults from the European
Union in the form of frequent criticism and seemingly endless demands
for reform play directly into the hands of nationalists and Islamists
waiting to tap into a broken and defensive Turkish psyche.
Europeans, meanwhile, have a litany of complaints about Turkey: Its
refusal to look objectively at the past, notably the massacre of
Armenians after World War I that many historians call a genocide;
its intransigence on key diplomatic issues like recognizing the
Greek-speaking part of Cyprus, which has been a full EU member since
2004; its poor record on human rights and treatment of its Kurdish
minority; its intolerance to free speech that runs to the extent that
“insulting Turkishness” is a crime; its outsized admiration for its
military; its unwillingness to abandon some elements of its Islamic
culture, such as hardline attitudes toward adultery and homosexuality.
Many here fault Turkey’s old rivals Greece and Cyprus for the growing
acrimony, claiming they are lobbying the EU to take a hard line over
Turkey’s refusal to extend its customs union with the EU to the Greek
Cypriot part of Cyprus. Turkey does not recognize the Cyprus government
and props up the internationally unrecognized administration in the
north of the island.
On Thursday, a meeting that was supposed to be a last-ditch effort
to settle the Cyprus problem was canceled, leaving the Turks with
very little time to negotiate before the EU’s year-end deadline to
concede or see talks suspended.
What would happen if the talks collapsed?
First, the symbolic value of having a 99 percent Muslim, democratic
nation firmly integrated into the West would be lost. Turkey’s 71
million citizens, educated to look to Europe for inspiration since
the country’s secular tranformation in the 1920s, might look elsewhere
for positive reinforcement.
“Nationalists are benefiting from this, there’s no question about it,”
said pollster and political science professor Hakan Yilmaz.
Islamic countries of the Middle East, Central Asia and North Africa,
with which Turkey’s Islamic-rooted government has been forging
increasingly close ties, might be natural surrogates for a Turkey
spurned.
But there is a sense on the street that a complete breakup with the
EU is out of the question.
Yilmaz said many EU leaders were just playing to the crowd by publicly
belittling Turkey. “Some in the European Union public love this
humiliation particularly in France,” he said, alluding to a proposed
French law that would make it a crime to say Turks did not commit
genocide against Armenians.
Meanwhile, some leading politicians on both sides are trying to
make the relationship so miserable that Turkey will just walk away
on its own, said Ilter Turan, a political analyst at Istanbul Bilgi
University.
But Turan added that any Turkish government that walked away from
the EU would be excoriated by the Turkish public, despite the current
anti-EU mood.
The key question appears to be how to persuade Turkey to change
without damaging national pride.
“There is one thing where the Turkish public seems to be rather
adamant,” Turan said, getting to the heart of what Turks want in
this relationship. “If there is to be a union, it is to be on equal
grounds.”
Kapici, the security guard, said he didn’t think the EU would ever
take Turkey, but at least it was good for his country to try.
“I’m a Muslim, praise God,” he said. “But I don’t want to be part of
an Arab Union or something. It’s always better for Turkey to be on
the side of Europe.”
Benjamin Harvey has covered Turkey since 2005.

La Nouvelle Republique du Centre Ouest
03 novembre 2006 vendredi
Edition DEUX SEVRES
” Armenie mon amie ” en valeur a Faymoreau
D.M.
L’annee de l’Armenie en France se decline aussi en Vendee, où le
conseil general vient d’engager une cooperation economique et
culturelle avec ce pays ami. Vendredi 27 octobre, la delegation
armenienne, en voyage d’etudes pour une semaine, a participe au
vernissage d’une exposition rare, dans la chapelle des mineurs de
Faymoreau (près de Saint-Laurs) : ” Tresors d’Armenie ” (1). Edward
Nalbandian, ambassadeur d’Armenie, et Gagik Gyurjyan, ministre
adjoint de la Culture et de la Jeunesse, conduisaient la delegation
au côte du president du conseil general de Vendee. Cette expo dans le
petite village ” phare ” du bassin minier de Faymoreau/Saint-Laurs,
en avant-première nationale, prendra ensuite le chemin du Louvre, ou
de ville comme Lyon. Dans la petite chapelle, une soixantaine
d’objets de l’art chretien, pour la plupart dates du V au XVIII
siècle, temoignent de l’anciennete et du raffinement de la culture
armenienne, premier Etat chretien du monde depuis l’an 301. L’expo
est aussi chargee de symboles, comme cette porte de monastère cachee
par les Armeniens lors du genocide dans l’empire ottoman :
” Cette exposition met en valeur tout le spectre de l’identite
armenienne structuree par une spiritualite singulière, a travers les
Khatchkars, veritables professions de foi gravees dans la pierre sans
equivalent ailleurs, les vestiges monastiques, des objets de cultes,
des splendides pièces d’art liturgique armenien ainsi que des
vetements ou tapis “,note Edward Nalbandian. La presence de ces
oeuvres sacrees ou culturelles en la chapelle de Faymoreau, mises en
valeur par la lumière eclatante des dix-neuf grands vitraux, est
exceptionnelle. Ne vous en privez pas !
(1) Entree libre tous les jours jusqu’au dimanche 3 decembre inclus,
de 10 h a 12 h et de 14 h a 18 h. Catalogue explicatif gratuit.
–Boundary_(ID_a4TgibFNL5RkUGrqLMgzXA)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

IN HOLDING REFORMS IN SCIENCE AND EDUCATION ARMENIA INTENDS TO TAKE
OVER FOREIGN EXPERIENCE
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 3 2006
Today, Deputy Minister of Science and Education Ara Avetisyan said
at a press- conference that while holding reforms in the spheres of
education and science Armenia gives much importance to the foreign
experience, and the Ministry of Science and Education has also studied
the educational systems of foreign states.
He reminded that on July 24, 2006, on the Armenian President’s
instructions, an interdepartmental commission was established for
realizing scientific reforms. The members of the commission are
representatives of the Armenian governmental and presidential staffs,
the National Academy of Sciences, the Ministries of Finances and
Economy, Trade and Economic Development, Science and Education. 3
working groups were set up, which prepared the draft reforms in the
sphere of science. In the near future, the draft reforms will be put
to public discussion. Ara Avetisyan said that 2 of the working groups
will visit Hungary and Czech Republic, and the third one will visit
Lithuania and Poland. They will study the mechanisms of governing,
as well as the ways and sizes of financing science. He emphasized that
Hungary and Czech Republic have a more Soviet structure of science and
reforms, therefore their experience can help the Armenian scientific
system in many respects.
Ara Avetisyan noted that the Armenian Government has approved the
list and schedule of activities in the sphere of science. The main
tasks of the scientific reforms are to create a united system of
governance, to increase the efficiency of scientific organizations,
to realize infrastructure and a material and technical basis in
the sphere of education, to increase the efficiency of financing,
to integrate science and education.

Liberation , France
3 novembre 2006
La negation, objet legitime du droit;
Il s’agit de distinguer entre la contestation ideologique et
dangereuse et le doute ou le questionnement, propres a toute
recherche scientifique.
par GARIBIAN Sevane; Sevane GARIBIAN juriste, doctorante en droit
public, Paris-X-Nanterre.
Le texte de Jerôme de Hemptinne (Liberation du 25 octobre) pose une
question importante et necessaire, dont la reponse permettrait de
combler un trou creuse par le debat actuel sur la negation saisie par
le droit : comment cette negation est-elle definie en droit ?
Autrement dit, quel est le sens de l’interdit pose par la proposition
de loi recemment adoptee a l’Assemblee nationale visant a penaliser
la negation du genocide des Armeniens, sur le modèle de la loi
Gayssot ?
Tant le langage courant que le langage historiographique ont
longtemps defini le negationnisme comme une doctrine ou une position
ideologique consistant a nier la realite du genocide du peuple juif
et, plus particulièrement, l’existence des chambres a gaz. Depuis
plusieurs annees deja, au regard de la realite et de l’actualite d’un
phenomène qui s’etend, l’usage du mot “negation” est elargi a la
contestation d’autres genocides ; un “assassinat de la memoire”,
comme etape ultime du processus genocidaire, dont tout le monde
s’accorde a dire, a la suite de Pierre Vidal-Naquet, qu’il perpetue
le crime.
La negation devient objet du droit avec l’adoption de la loi Gayssot
en 1990. L’interpretation des juges francais et europeens en la
matière permet de degager les limites qui cadrent l’interdit et
garantissent sa conformite aux libertes fondamentales. La
jurisprudence relative aux affaires de negationnisme est fort
eclairante quant a la signification, restrictive, attribuee a ce
terme : la negation ne tombe sous le coup de la loi que dans la
mesure où elle constitue un “trouble illicite de nature a porter
atteinte a l’ordre public”, dont le droit au respect de la dignite
humaine est une composante. Et les juges ont, par ailleurs, eu
l’occasion de souligner que les interets proteges par l’interdit
comprennent notamment “les fondements d’une societe democratique”.
L’element cle dans la definition juridique de la negation est
l’intention de nuire du contestataire, dont la mauvaise foi, non
presumee, doit etre prouvee par l’accusation. Ce n’est pas l’opinion
en tant que telle qui est punie, mais la diffusion de cette opinion
en tant qu’acte ideologique, de mauvaise foi, exprimant sous couvert
de scientificite une propagande antisemite, raciste ou haineuse,
susceptible de produire des effets indesirables dans une democratie.
L’absence d’une presomption de mauvaise foi en matière de
negationnisme constitue, en outre, une difference fondamentale entre
ce delit et d’autres delits de presse pourtant proches, tels que la
diffamation ou la provocation a la discrimination raciale. Elle vise,
precisement, la preservation du principe de la libre recherche
scientifique, lequel principe, s’il permet de revisiter des faits
historiques, implique, aussi, une responsabilite.
Il s’agit de distinguer la contestation ideologique et dangereuse du
doute ou du questionnement, propres a toute recherche scientifique.
Contrairement a ce que semble craindre Jerôme de Hemptinne, il n’est
pas question de “rester muet”. Mais d’etre responsable lorsque l’on
remet en cause la realite d’un crime de genocide, dont la
specificite, tout comme celle du delit de negationnisme, est
determinee par l’intention qui motive l’acte.
–Boundary_(ID_gIpDhVj5pRpTGLHIOme9kw)–