ARMENIAN PATRIARCH KAREKIN DEFENDS ARMENIAN CLAIMS IN TURKEY
By Melike Duransoy, JTW
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
June 27 2007
* Karekin II: “Ankara should recognise the Armenian massacre”
* Armenian Patriarch Karekin Defends Armenian Claims in Turkey. Turks
say that if a Turkish man defends Turkish ideas on the histoical
claims in Armenia he or she would face very rude attitudes
* Karekin II conducted a service on Sunday in the central church of
the Turkish Armenian Patriarchy, Istanbul
* NATO PA Vice-president, Turkish diplomat Vahit Erdem had been
deprived of the office car and guard and he was considered as ‘enemy’
because of his statements on the historical Armenian claims
ISTANBUL (JTW)- Armenian General Patriarch Karekin II, currently on
a visit to Turkey, on Sunday said that Ankara should recognise the
so-called Armenian genocide of 1915.
Speaking at a press conference after conducting a mass in an Armenian
church in Istanbul, Karekin II said the allegations of genocide against
the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian community had been studied for 90 years
by academics and there is no for any discussion or any more study on
the issue.
“For our people the genocide is not an issue of research,” he said.
“This is an incident that has happened and its has to be recognised.”
Turkey has not accepted the Armenian allegations since the
establishment of the modern republic. Turks argue that more
than 520,000 Turkish people were massacred by the armed Armenian
groups during the First World War and there was no genocide or any
state-sponsored massacre against Armenians.
Karekin II said that Armenia was very willing to develop relations
with Turkey and stressed that if the two countries worked together
constructive solutions could be found to the problem.
In response to Turkey giving high points to Armenia in the Eurovision
Song Contest, Karekin II said that this should be seen as a positive
step.
Turkish Armenian experts however argues that Karekin II is lucky
because he was speaking in a ‘democratic country’. Dr. Nilgun Gulcan
for instance told the JTW that no Turkish could defend Turkish
perspective in Armenia.
Dr. Gulcan further says:
“You may find any pro-Armenian book in Turkish bookstores and you
can freely defend the Armenian or any other perspectives in Turkey.
Almost all ‘genocide’ literature have been translated Turkish
language. We clearly understood what the Armenians think about the
1915 Events. But Armenians have no idea about Turkish perspective.
They do not listen. They think that, if they listen to the Turks,
they would commit a great sin. You have to risk your life to defend
Turkish perspective in Armenia. No Turk defending Turkish perspective
could go to Armenia. A Turkish historian was in Armenia last year
and spent months in an Armenian prison. And Turkish MP and NATO PA
Vice-president Vahit Erdem faced difficulties in yerevan when he said
that there was no genocide at all.”
Turkish prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan offered to establish a common
commission to discuss the historical disputes between the Turks and
Armenians, however Arzmenia rejected the offer and declared “there
is nothing to be discussed”.
According to Dr. Sedat laciner from Ankara-based Turkish
think tank USAK, the Armenian approach regarding the past is
“shut-up-and-accept-it” policy. “They do not listen to what you say.
They try to order Turkish people to accept what they think. This is
not the best way to develop any co-operation” Dr. Laciner says.

ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER VISITS GEORGIA
The Messenger, Georgia
June 27 2007
On June 27 the Armenian Foreign Minister, Vardan Oskanyan, will pay
an official visit to Georgia, the news agency Black Sea Press reports.
As ArmInfo was told with reference to the press-service of the Foreign
Ministry of Armenia, during the visit meetings with President of
Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili, Foreign Affairs Minister Gela Bezhuashvili
and Speaker of Parliament Nino Burjanadze are planned.
The delegation headed by Oskanyan will return to Yerevan on June 28.

ARMENIA DOES NOT COMPLY WITH RESOLUTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, ALIYEV
Democracy Azerbaijan
Ïðaâî Âûaîða, Azerbaijan
June 27 2007
“The Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh and all other
international issues should be settled only within some framework.
This problem cannot be solved in accordance with anybody’s desire,
in particular, if this desire does not reflect the reality and is
beyond the framework of the international law”, said President Ilham
Aliyev in his speech at the graduation ceremony at Heydar Aliyev High
Military School.
“International law applies to all countries. If international rules,
norms of behavior, decisions of international organizations are
not observed and the decisions do not result in taking measures,
it will break all international rules of behavior since the world
is governed in accordance with some rules. All countries are members
of the United Nations and UN is the world’s major organization. This
organization has adopted four resolutions on the Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict, which openly state that armed occupation forces should
unconditionally leave the occupied territories” he continued.
“Unfortunately, Armenia disregards this and does not comply with
these resolutions. In this case, we no longer count on international
mechanisms of settlement”, President Ilham Aliyev added.
–Boundary_(ID_QYacdVcji7hEta9Y2J6WiA)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

National Review Online
June 09, 2006
Long, Hot Summer
Border enforcement and the deaths of illegal immigrants.
By Mark Krikorian
This week marked the start of the season for media features on illegal
aliens dying in the desert. The Washington Post’s entry on Tuesday was
especially horrific, telling of a blameless three-year-old boy who died of
dehydration and exposure as he accompanied his mother across the border.
Sixty Minutes, meanwhile, reran on Sunday a more policy-oriented offering,
but pegged it to the death of 18-year-old Abran Gonzales, “a quiet kid. He
never hurt anybody. He just wanted to work and come back home.”
The message of these stories, and the cascade of other stories we will see
from the mainstream media over the next few months, is that such tragedies
are the result of increased border enforcement, which, in the Post
reporter’s words, `funneled them onto increasingly perilous trails where
temperatures are high, water is scarce and danger is abundant.’
It’s true, of course, that the concentration of enforcement resources near
the urban areas of San Diego and El Paso over the past decade or so shifted
the crossing patterns to more remote areas, especially to the Arizona
desert. And while it’s not clear that the total number of border deaths has
actually increased (since many people were killed in traffic accidents and
criminal assaults during the chaotic years when those two cities were the
focus of illegal crossings), the human toll is real, and heartrending.
But are tighter border controls really the cause? Is elite opinion right in
implying that we, as a nation, are responsible for the deaths of these
people by trying to control our borders? If so, then perhaps the supporters
of open borders are right and American sovereignty is itself a crime.
Fortunately not.
Many people share culpability for these deaths. The illegals themselves, of
course, are moral agents and responsible for their actions (including
endangering their children – how, unless you’re fleeing certain death, can
you justify risking the life of a three-year-old in a trackless wasteland?).
The smugglers, many of them scum of the earth, not infrequently abandon
their charges to the vultures. And the thieving elites of Mexico and the
other dysfunctional societies in Latin America also share the burden.
Interestingly, the standard culprit in polite opinion – the Border Patrol – is
not only blameless, but spends much of its time rescuing helpless illegals,
saving thousands of lives.
We, as Americans, do share responsibility, but not in the way that
fashionable thinking would have you believe. It’s not border enforcement, as
such, that’s at fault, but rather the toxic combination of tough (or at
least tougher) border enforcement with easy access to jobs.
The job magnet is strong because few businesses are ever punished for hiring
illegals, making the opportunities in America worth the risk of the
dangerous crossing. The amount of investigative time devoted to worksite
enforcement of immigration laws fell steadily from 1999 to 2003, dropping by
more than half, according to the GAO. The number of worksite arrests fell by
84 percent. And, from 1999 to 2004, the number of fines issued to employers
fell by 99 percent, plummeting to a laughable nationwide total of three.
Only in the past six months, after a quarter century of scorched-earth
resistance from open-borders advocates, have the two houses of Congress
separately voted to require businesses to verify the Social Security numbers
of new hires – and it still may not come to pass because of irreconcilable
differences in the bills.
And it’s not just jobs. The government at all levels has taken many actions
over the past few years to make life easier for illegal aliens – the Treasury
Department signaling to banks that Mexico’s illegal-alien ID card is an
acceptable credential for opening bank accounts; legislatures offering
in-state tuition subsidies to illegals attending state universities; and
city councils barring local police from using immigration law in the course
of their duties.
In other words, we’ve told prospective illegal aliens that they’ll have to
risk their lives to get in, but once they’re clear of the border, they’re
home free. With government establishing that kind of incentive structure,
it’s a wonder more people don’t die in the desert.
While no one is pleased by the deaths, Americans like the idea that
foreigners are willing to take such risks to get into our country. At a time
when the ties that bind us as a people are increasingly frayed and Muslim
fanatics plot to nuke us, we take some consolation in the fact that many
outsiders still want to come here to live. As Gov. George W. Bush (quoted in
Boy Genius) said of a remote and treacherous part of the Texas border,
“Hell, if they’ll walk across Big Bend, we want ’em.”
But as a civilized people, we must face up to our responsibility for the
border deaths and stop sending mixed messages. We face two morally
consistent choices: on the one hand, we can continue to ignore worksite
enforcement, but open the borders. This would bring our interior and border
strategies in sync and stop forcing aliens to cross in remote and deadly
areas. It would also mean the dissolution of the American republic.
Or, we can get serious about upholding the law everywhere in our country,
combining strong border controls with muscular interior enforcement. This
means not only more arrests and deportations, but also a comprehensive
firewall strategy that would bar illegals from access to important
institutions of our society – no jobs, no bank accounts, no driver’s
licenses, no car loans, no mortgages.
By ending the mixed messages we send illegals, we can fundamentally change
the incentives they face, and the decisions they make. In this way, American
people can both protect the nation’s sovereignty and minimize these tragic
deaths at the same time.
Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies
and an NRO contributor.
————————————- ———————————–
National Review Online –
ZTI1NTQ4NmNkMzZhNTc5ODgzYzAyOTU

PRESS RELEASE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-10) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web:

Georgia’s Foreign Minister Gela Bezuashvili received Armenia’s Foreign
Minister Vartan Oskanian in Tbilisi, on June 27, on the first day of
Minister Oskanian’s working visit to Georgia.

In their welcoming remarks, the two foreign ministers shared the belief that
Armenian-Georgian relations, based on solid historic ties, will continue to
develop in the spirit of friendship and cooperation.

The two ministers discussed bilateral issues in detail. They noted that the
Armenian-Georgian bilateral agenda is a full one and this broad-based
relationship is reflected in frequent and high-level visits.

The sides stressed the need to further coordinate economic and business ties
in order to encourage greater trade and more investments. They noted that
the development of economically efficient transport routes is essential for
greater economic activity. They also discussed issues related to energy
security. The two ministers explored ways to seek the assistance of
international organizations and individual countries in cross-border rural
development programs.

Armenia’s Foreign Minister stressed the economic and political importance of
the operation of the Kars-Gyumri-Tbilisi rail line, and its contribution to
the growth of trade in the region, equally benefiting all countries.

The Georgian Foreign Minister affirmed that Georgia is aware of its bridging
role and responsibility in the region and will continue to work for more
favorable transit conditions for Armenia. He explained that Georgia , too,
is interested in ensuring diversified transport routes.

In discussing Javakhk, Minister Oskanian stressed that the Armenian
government stands prepared to work with the Georgian government to resolve
the socio-economic problems facing the population of Javakhk.

They addressed issues of border delimitation and confirmed that there exists
the political will on both sides to resolve outstanding issues and reach a
mutually acceptable solution.

Regarding euro-integration processes, and specifically the European
Neighborhood Policy and deepening cooperation with NATO, they noted the
importance of coordinating efforts.

Minister Oskanian briefed his colleague on the current state of the Nagorno
Karabakh negotiations. In turn, Minister Bezuashvili spoke about the
negotiations surrounding Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

The meeting between the ministers was followed by a joint press conference.

Later on the same day, Georgia’s President Mikhail Saakashvili received
Armenia’s Foreign Minister.

On Wednesday, the Minister’s visit will continue.

ARMENIA NEGOTIATES READMISSION AGREEMENTS WITH SEVERAL COUNTRIES
Armenpress
Jun 27 2006
YEREVAN, JUNE 27, ARMENPRESS: Armenia has signed readmission agreements
with Latvia, Lithuania, Denmark and Switzerland and is negotiating
readmission agreements with Benelux countries, Germany, Norway,
the Czech Republic, Sweden, Poland, Ukraine, Bulgaria and Russia.
According to deputy foreign minister Armen Baybourdian, signing
of readmission agreements with EU member countries is viewed as a
condition for Armenia for closer integration with the European Union.
He said readmission by Armenia of its citizens living illegally in
some EU countries is supposed to facilitate in future granting visas
to Armenian citizens wishing to visit these countries.
Armenia has developed a special re-integration program for readmitted
Armenians, under which they are provided with various assistance,
jobs, education for children and those who want to start a business
are given a $4,000 loan.

RADIO FREE EUROPE/RADIO LIBERTY, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC
_________________________________________ __________________
RFE/RL Balkan Report
Vol. 10, No. 6, 27 June 2006
A Weekly Review of Politics, Media, and Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty Broadcasts in the western Balkans
***************************************** *******************
HEADLINES:
* MOVING TOWARD ENDGAME IN KOSOVA
* BLACK HOLES AND WHITE ELEPHANTS IN THE BALKANS
****************************************** ******************
MOVING TOWARD ENDGAME IN KOSOVA. Denmark’s Soren Jessen-Petersen
leaves Kosova as head of the UN civilian administration (UNMIK) at
the end of June. His successor is likely to be the last person in
that post before the international community and Kosovar leaders
agree on the details of how Kosova will move toward independence.
Jessen-Petersen will probably be remembered by most Kosovar
Albanians as the best leader of UNMIK during the transition from
Serbian rule, which effectively ended with the departure of Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic’s forces in June 1999, and the
declaration of Kosova’s independence, the circumstances of which
are likely to be clear before the end of 2006. The international
community has made it clear that Belgrade will not have a veto over
Kosova’s future. Most commentators agree that
Jessen-Petersen’s successor will be the last person to head
UNMIK, which began long ago to hand over some of its functions to
officials of the elected Kosovar government.
Unlike some of his predecessors, Jessen-Petersen did his
homework relating to his job and did not consider himself bound to
steer a middle course in every controversy that came along. It was
during his term in office that the UN and the major international
powers — whether they said so in public or not — came to accept
that “political limbo” could not be continued indefinitely because it
would compound the fears and frustrations of the 90 percent ethnic
Albanian majority and possibly lead to more violence like that which
shook the province in March 2004 (see “RFE/RL Balkan Report,”
September 10 and December 17, 2004). He also recognized that the only
way forward was to move toward independence, albeit with strong
guarantees for the Serbs and other minorities.
His unambiguous views and his reputed closeness to some
ethnic Albanian political leaders, such as Ramush Haradinaj of the
Alliance for the Future of Kosova (AAK), prompted some Serbian
politicians to call for his resignation, but such tactics only served
to underscore the weakness of the Serbian position. The local Serbs,
whose future will ultimately lie with their Albanian neighbors in an
independent state, by and large boycott Kosova’s growing
institutions of self-government at the behest of Belgrade and thereby
miss out on the opportunity to put their mark on the new state from
the beginning.
The Belgrade politicians, who have expected to face early
elections for well over a year, are reluctant to say or do anything
that voters might interpret as showing “weakness” regarding Kosova.
They thus waste time and energy over Kosova, which some of them
privately admit is “lost” anyway, that could be put to use in dealing
with Serbia’s real problems, which are crime, poverty,
corruption, and a democracy deficit. Some observers go one step
further and suggest that the politicians deliberately draw
voters’ attention to the Kosova issue in order to divert their
gaze away from those same politicians’ poor track record in
improving the daily lot of ordinary Serbs.
On June 20, Jessen-Petersen submitted his final report to the
UN Security Council. He made it clear that the elected Kosovar
institutions have made good progress toward implementing the
international community’s standards, particularly since Prime
Minister Agim Ceku was nominated in March. Jessen-Petersen noted that
many members of the Serbian minority have cause for complaint, but
added that he hopes that their problems will be dealt with quickly.
He also stressed that the Serbs should not consider themselves
victims of deliberate oppression, and he repeated his call for them
to take part in public life. He warned of the dangers inherent in the
prolongation of the unclear political status, which, he argued, must
be settled in keeping with the wishes of the majority while
respecting the rights of the minority.
It will be incumbent on the ethnic Albanians to offer the
Serbs fair treatment under the rule of law. If the Albanians fail to
do so, they can expect difficulties with the international community.
But the violent incidents that take place from time to time seem
sporadic rather than planned, may be rooted in personal or criminal
rather than in ethnic disputes, and could be, at least in some cases,
engineered by Serbian extremists in order to maintain tensions and
discredit the Kosovar government.
There are, however, few observers who expect many of the
Serbian refugees and displaced persons to return to their old homes.
While their numbers are uncertain, figures of around 235,000 often
surface in the media, but Kosovar officials claim that the real
number is lower.
The root of the problem is that the Albanians tend to
distrust local Serbs in general because of the active role that many
of them played in bringing Milosevic to power in the second half of
the 1980s and in keeping him there. Perhaps more important, most
Albanians believe that Milosevic’s repressive campaign of
1998-99, which culminated in the “ethnic cleansing” of the Albanians
in the spring of 1999, could not have been carried out without the
active participation of local Serbs, both as combatants and as
providers of “human intelligence” about their neighbors. Some German
Balkan experts have drawn parallels with the Czech attitude at the
end of World War II toward the Sudeten Germans, whom the Czechs
regarded as an incorrigible Fifth Column, even though Kosovar
officials are at pains to stress that local Serbs will enjoy full
protection of the law.
The local Serbs, for their part, remain fearful. Violent
incidents against Serbs have contributed to this tense climate,
particularly when those killed or injured are the very young or very
old. It should be recalled that in launching his wars in Croatia and
in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the early 1990s, Milosevic was able to
exploit the fears of local Serbs there who refused to accept that
they might possibly live safely and peacefully as a minority in a
state in which others constituted the majority. The Serbs of Kosova
today are no less worried than were the Serbs of Krajina in 1990,
even if they are not seriously planning to arm themselves or
expecting military help from Belgrade. Meanwhile, most local Serbian
politicians have displayed more skill in criticizing and complaining
that in providing leadership or offering constructive programs.
As Jessen-Petersen’s mandate comes to its end, Kosova
moves toward a clarification of its final status. Most international
commentators point out that anything short of independence, however
qualified, is simply unrealistic. As Montenegro celebrates its newly
won statehood, and Serbia finds itself in growing international
disrepute over its failure to arrest and extradite former Bosnian
Serb commander General Ratko Mladic, Kosova’s independence
probably seems even more realistic that it did at the start of 2006.
(Patrick Moore)
BLACK HOLES AND WHITE ELEPHANTS IN THE BALKANS. One truism of
postcommunist Europe is that all the countries of Eastern Europe and
the Balkans will sooner or later join the EU and NATO. It seems,
however, that the countries of the western Balkans might find
themselves in a “black hole” outside the EU for the foreseeable
future even if they are surrounded by member states (see “RFE/RL
Balkan Report,” December 9, 2005).
Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosova, Macedonia,
Montenegro, and Serbia face uncertainty in their hopes to join the
EU. The Brussels-based bloc has a particular attraction for the
countries of the region for three reasons.
First, membership means a seat at the table where decisions
affecting all of Europe are made. The small Balkan states might not
wield much influence, but it is better to be inside looking out than
outside looking in, or so the argument has run.
Second, joining the EU symbolizes the end of the
continent’s division and the inclusion of former communist
countries — including war-torn states — in the “rich man’s
club.” For former Yugoslavs, whose passport was once the only one in
Europe with which one could travel freely to the East or West without
a visa, it means a return to a normal situation. It also means an end
to the inconvenience and humiliation of having to go through often
long procedures for something that was once simple, such as a visit
to relatives working in Germany. The importance of visa-free travel
for ordinary people in the western Balkans should not be
underestimated.
And third, as poorer members of a wealthy organization, the
western Balkan states would be able to look forward to a cornucopia
of subsidies, as well as opportunities for more or less unrestricted
study and work abroad. In short, even if NATO membership will someday
provide for these countries’ security requirements, joining the
EU is still regarded in the region as an essential stage in its rite
of passage into the modern, prosperous, and democratic world.
For Brussels, integrating the western Balkans has long meant
that there will be no “black hole” in the middle of the EU —
especially after Bulgaria and Romania join in 2008 or so — in which
organized crime could flourish. More recently, some Western
governments have come to see EU membership for the western Balkans as
a way of keeping out of that region unwelcome but well-funded
political, criminal, or religious influences from Russia or the
Middle East.
By offering the prospect of membership, the EU has, moreover,
a powerful lever to influence precisely the kind of changes — called
“reforms” — that it wants to see implemented. Progress has been slow
in some countries, but the view from Brussels for years was that it
is better to have slow progress than to isolate a potentially
volatile region that is indisputably part of Europe and right on the
doorstep of several member states.
But then on May 29, 2005, French voters rejected the proposed
EU constitution by a clear majority, and Dutch voters did the same by
an even larger margin three days later. In both cases, objections to
further enlargement of the EU after the admission of 10 new members
in 2004 played at least some role in the vote.
One year after those two votes, the EU is none the clearer as
to its goals and how to achieve them. In June 2006, a summit took
place in Vienna, but there was no agreement on any of the key issues,
including the fate of the constitution. The only consensus seemed to
be in putting off any possible movement on thorny questions until the
German presidency in the first half of 2007, or maybe to the French
presidency in the second half of 2008.
It was perhaps telling for the newer members — and those who
would like to join — that a joint declaration by the Czech Republic,
Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, and Slovakia was “slapped down,” as the
“Financial Times” put it on June 17, by Luxembourg, Germany, and
other, unnamed EU founder states. The five Central European countries
had called into question what they regard as their second-class
status within the bloc and demonstrated their willingness to work
together. Some observers recalled French President Jacques
Chirac’s remark about a 2003 declaration by a similar group of
countries, which backed the United States over Iraq. The French
leader said at that time that they had missed an opportunity to “shut
up.”
Before and during the summit, several leaders of older member
states made it clear that one cannot speak of enlargement, at least
beyond Romania and Bulgaria, before the growing EU has decided at
least on how it will manage its internal affairs. That would mean
2009 at the very earliest. Consequently, many people in countries
hoping to join that body began to fear that their chances of
obtaining membership within a reasonable time frame have become much
slimmer as a result.
This was true for Croatia, which has long sought to convince
itself that its membership on the heels of Romania and Bulgaria was a
foregone conclusion. Many people in the western Balkans suspected
that the EU was keeping them at arm’s length as a pretext for
dodging the larger and more controversial question of Turkish
membership. After all, the reasoning in the Balkans went, had not the
West Europeans told them for years that integrating such small states
would not require much money and effort on Brussels’ part?
Meanwhile, antireform forces in the Balkans took heart,
blocking police and constitutional reform in Bosnia. In Serbia, they
continue to thwart the arrest and extradition to the Hague-based war
crimes tribunal of former Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic, with the
result that relations between Belgrade and Brussels are on hold.
The question then arises: if Brussels is unlikely to offer
the western Balkans a serious “European perspective” within a clear
time frame, and if some people in those countries are becoming less
enamored of a EU that does not seem to want them, might it not be
time for the people in the western Balkans to reexamine old beliefs
about the necessary postcommunist rite of passage and look for
alternatives? Has not the obsession with EU membership become
something of a white elephant, like the EU-sponsored bridge over the
Prut River from Romania to Moldova that stood unused for several
years for want of a road on the Moldovan side?
How else might the countries of the region modernize their
economies and expand their markets than with top-down efforts at
nation building and seemingly endless rules imposed from abroad?
Might it not be to their advantage to concentrate first on developing
straightforward free-trade and travel arrangements that would not
involve compromising what for most of them is newly won sovereignty
in favor of a distant and unelected bureaucracy?
Some Euroskeptics have long argued that the EU is cumbersome,
inflexible, nontransparent, and dominated by Paris and Berlin. Might
some other parts of Europe now find themselves faced with an
opportunity to develop alternative ideas to the EU model that are
simpler, more democratic, and hence more likely to produce clear
results and win popular support? After all, there is no better
incentive for learning to think outside the box than being denied
permission to enter the box. (Patrick Moore)
NOTABLE QUOTATIONS: “Accusing the European Union for the
country’s own failures is not serious. [EU Enlargement]
Commissioner [Olli] Rehn considers that it is in the hands of Serbia
and its leaders to fulfill the conditions and realize the EU
perspective.” — Krisztina Nagy, Rehn’s spokeswoman. Quoted by
RFE/RL on June 21.
“We are looking for Kosova to become a normal country.” —
Prime Minister Agim Ceku to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
in Washington on June 19. Quoted by RFE/RL.
(Compiled by Patrick Moore)
******************************************* **************
Copyright (c) 2006. RFE/RL, Inc. All rights reserved.
The “RFE/RL Balkan Report” is prepared by Patrick Moore based on
sources including reporting by RFE/RL’s South Slavic and Albanian
Languages Service. It is distributed once a month.
Direct content-related comments to Patrick Moore in Prague at
[email protected] or by phone at (+4202) 2112-3631.
For information on reprints, see:
p
Back issues are online at

PRESS RELEASE
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, Information Services
Address: Vagharshapat, Republic of Armenia
Contact: Rev. Fr. Ktrij Devejian
Tel: (374 10) 517 163
Fax: (374 10) 517 301
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website:
June 26, 2006
His Holiness Karekin II Meets Governor of Istanbul
On June 23, His Holiness Karekin II, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All
Armenians, visited Mr. Muammer Güler, Governor of Istanbul, at the
governor’s office. His Holiness was accompanied by His Beatitude Archbishop
Mesrob Mutafian, Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople; His Eminence
Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church
of America (Eastern); Mr. Karen Mirzoyan, Representative of the Republic of
Armenia in Turkey; and Mr. Bedros Shirinoghlu, Chairman of the Pontifical
Visit Committee.
The Catholicos of All Armenians expressed his happiness to be in Istanbul
through the joint invitation of the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Armenian
Patriarch of Constantinople, and noted his pleasure to have the opportunity
to closely know the Armenian community of Istanbul.
In his remarks, His Holiness Karekin II stated his awareness of the
achievements of the Armenian community of Istanbul in its national and
spiritual life. His Holiness also noted that there are certain issues which
exist in the Armenian community related to properties and educational
matters, and expressed his hope that they will find their positive
solutions.
Governor Güler welcomed the visit of the Pontiff of All Armenians to
Istanbul, and conveyed his hope that the relations between the Armenian and
Turkish peoples will improve.
At the conclusion of the meeting, His Holiness Karekin II, reflecting on the
relations between the two peoples, confirmed that the Armenian people have
the same desires to see them improved and stressed his conviction that
relations will progress based on the principles of justice.
During the meeting, they also discussed matters related to the Pontifical
Visit of the Catholicos of All Armenians and the activities of the
governor’s office.

PRESS RELEASE
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, Information Services
Address: Vagharshapat, Republic of Armenia
Contact: Rev. Fr. Ktrij Devejian
Tel: (374 10) 517 163
Fax: (374 10) 517 301
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website:
June 27, 2006
His Holiness Karekin II Celebrates Pontifical Divine Liturgy in Istanbul
On Sunday, June 25, as the culmination of the first Pontifical Visit of the
Catholicos of All Armenians to the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople,
His Holiness Karekin II celebrated a Pontifical Divine Liturgy in the St.
Astvatsatsin (Holy Mother of God) Cathedral of Istanbul. In attendance for
the Divine Liturgy were Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople His Beatitude
Archbishop Mesrob Mutafian, high-ranking archbishops and bishops of the
Armenian Church from Armenia and the Diaspora, among them the primates of
the dioceses of North America, Germany, Damascus, Romania and Bulgaria, the
Vicar General of the Araratian Pontifical Diocese, the Chancellor of the
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, representatives of sister Churches, Mr.
Karen Mirzoyan (Representative of the Republic of Armenia in Turkey), and
hundreds of Armenian faithful.
His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate of the Diocese of the
Armenian Church of America (Eastern), and His Grace Bishop Vicken Aykazian,
Diocesan Legate for the Eastern Diocese and President of the National
Council of Churches of America, assisted His Holiness at the Holy Altar
during the Liturgy.
During the sacred Divine Liturgy, His Holiness addressed his message to the
faithful, using as the theme of his sermon, the words of Christ: `Because I
live, you shall live also.’ (St. John 14:19). The Catholicos of All
Armenians first offered thanksgiving and glory to the Almighty, for granting
him the gift of visiting the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople in this
pontifical visit, and for the opportunity to offer the liturgy under the
cherished and prayer-filled arches of the historic cathedral with His
Beatitude Mesrob and his beloved faithful flock.
As he continued his message, the Pontiff of All Armenians stated, `Christ is
alive, as are all who believe in Him – the Savior of the world Who was
crucified for us, buried and rose again on the third day. Our people were
taught and raised in this manner. With this belief and by the vision of the
Illuminator, our people built Holy Etchmiadzin on our native soil, received
the letters of Mashtots as a heavenly gift, became firmly established in
their Christian identity, and when the time came, accepted `death with
meaning’ in the name of that faith, while living and creating with God at
their side.
`Truly, our people did not desire to live without God. The testimony of
this spiritual reality is presented in its most compelling manner through
the six-century history of the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople. The
names of the great patriarchs are immortal, who selflessly cared for the
people entrusted to them; and protected, raised and strengthened them with
the light of faith, transmitting the noble virtues of their graceful minds
and faithful souls to the generations. Immortalized also are the names of
those in the arts, education and science, as well as their works and
contributions. Treasures created with faith, which draw a wide path of
illumination upon the pages of our history, shaped a path of creation and
progress. With the power of faith, the Armenian Patriarchate of
Constantinople continues to carry the lamp of illumination…
`Being with you during these past few days, we once again had the experience
that our people always keep and protect the sacred mystery of a renewing
life in their deepest inner spaces. Not even the Armenian Genocide was able
to extinguish that light, when it appeared that life itself would end within
the borders of the Patriarchate. In the trials of our people, the spirit
alive with faith found the strength to be reborn and live yet again, to do
good works, create goodness and aspire towards goodness. The greatest
inheritance we received from our forefathers was faith in God, in our Lord
Jesus Christ. You, dear ones, and your parents kept and nurtured the faith
in your souls, transforming it into love for one another, laboring for each
other and for the glory of our Apostolic Holy Church.
`…Glory to you O Lord, that you directed our footsteps here from the Mother
See of Holy Etchmiadzin, and we became the witness to the blossoming
national and ecclesiastical life, and faithful and traditional spirit of our
people. We came from our cherished cradle of faith, so that together,
Pontiff and people, through the commemorations, exhortations and traditions
of our holy fathers, could testify with our unified prayer under the halls
of this holy church – that our Armenian nation is steadfast and unshakeable
in its oath sealed with God. It is loyal to the holy legacy of its
forebears and with its oath of unity with Holy Etchmiadzin.’
The Catholicos of All Armenians continued by exhorting the Armenians of
Istanbul to continue to create and flourish with the same dedication and
love, keeping all of their national institutions strong and vibrant. His
Holiness addressed words of thanks to His Beatitude Mesrob and the members
of the Religious Council of the Patriarchate for the warm reception which
had been prepared during these days of his first pontifical visit to
Istanbul.
His Holiness also extended his appreciation to the ranks of clergy of the
Armenian Patriarchate, to all administrative lay council members and
committees, the devoted choir members of the churches, national
organizations and associations, charitable institutions, teachers, artists,
and representatives of the Armenian press, for their fidelity to national
values and their brave and selfless devotion.
At the conclusion of his fatherly message to the Armenians of Istanbul, His
Holiness bestowed His Beatitude Mesrob with two panagias and a pectoral
cross from Holy Etchmiadzin as a symbol of the Pontiff’s appreciation for
the years of service and dedication of the Armenian Patriarch of
Constantinople.
Following the Liturgy, a reception was hosted in the hall of the
Patriarchate in honor of His Holiness. During his remarks, the Pontiff of
All Armenians expressed his thanks and appreciation to the chairman and all
members of the Pontifical Visit committee of the Patriarchate for their
efforts in successfully planning and implementing a well-organized and most
enjoyable visit.

Ecumenical News International
News Highlights
26 June 2006

UK lawmaker tackles government over stand on Ottoman massacres

London (ENI). A member of the British parliament, Stephen Pound
from the ruling Labour Party, has called on the British
government to declare that the mass deaths of Armenians,
Assyrians and Greeks in the former Ottoman Empire between 1915
and 1923 were genocide. Pound said in the House of Commons, the
lower parliamentary chamber: “I hope it is not contentious to say
that 3.5 million of the historic Christian population of
Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks then living in the Ottoman Empire
had been murdered – starved to death or slaughtered – or exiled
by 1923.” [383 words, ENI-06-0508]

ENI News Highlights contain summaries of ENI articles published
today.
This summary may be copied or re-posted provided the information
printed below is retained.

Individual paragraphs may be reproduced provided ENI is
acknowledged as the source.

ENI Online –

Ecumenical News International
PO Box 2100
CH – 1211 Geneva 2
Switzerland

Tel: (41-22) 791 6088/6111
Fax: (41-22) 788 7244
Email: [email protected]