HERVE DE CHARRETTE: PARLIAMENTS CANNOT DECIDE ON HISTORICAL FACTS
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
May 14 2006
PARIS – Parliaments cannot decide on historical facts, said Herve
de Charrette, the deputy chairman of French Parliamentary Foreign
Affairs Commission.
In an exclusive interview with A.A news agency correspondent, Charrette
announced that he is against the resolution, presented by the Socialist
Party, and which makes any denial of the so-called Armenian ‘genocide’
a crime.
Charrette, who is also the chairman of the French-Turkish Friendship
Group, noted that historical incidents must be examined by historians
and researchers.
“I am against this resolution since I attach great importance to
Turkish-French friendship,” he stressed.
Charrette indicated that he is optimistic that the resolution will
be rejected.
The resolution will be debated at the French parliament on May 18th.
The resolution has to be adopted at the Senate in order to be enacted.
French parliament passed a resolution acknowledging the so-called
genocide in 2001, and this caused a serious tension between Paris
and Ankara.
Armenian radicals name 1915 events as genocide while the Turks accuse
Arsmenians of commiting massacres against the Turkish people during
the First World War. More than 520.000 Muslims were massacred by the
Armenian armed groups in between 1915-1918.

FRENCH COMPANY TRADING WITH TURKEY WARNS FRANCE AGAINST ‘ARMENIAN BILL’
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
May 14 2006
MARSEILLES (France) – Tension between Turkey and France is mounting
over a bill to criminalize denial of the so-called Armenian ‘genocide’
due for discussion in the French Parliament on March 18.
Armenians and Turks accuse each other of committing genocide against
each other during the First World War.
French companies with commercial ties with Turkey are most concerned
over the escalation tensions between the two countries. Turkish media
clearly wrote that the bill will affect Turkish-French business ties.
French companies are expending every effort to persuade French
parliamentarians to vote against the bill that they fear will cause
them to suffer immeasurable commercial losses from future embargoes
imposed by Turkey, as the bill is chiefly designed to win Armenian
votes.
The De Villepin administration received a strong warning over the
Armenian bill from Eurocopter, one of the world’s largest helicopter
manufacturers with French partners, as the company fears losing a
contract to supply attack helicopters to the Turkish military late
this summer.
Fabrice Breiger, chief executive of Eurocopter, pointed to the
temporary nature of the crises that will eventually be overcome by
ties of friendship between the two countries:
“I am not a politician; I am the manager of an international company.
But that does not necessarily mean that I am not familiar with news
articles; it also does not imply that company managers cannot form
ideas about what is going on outside. As European industrialists,
we conveyed the necessary messages to European countries.”
Turkey had planned to buy attack and exploration helicopters for its
fight against terrorism, as part of the ATAK Project launched in 1996.
The Project, expected to cost $1.5 billion, was delayed for five
years and the previous tender was cancelled during a Defense Industry
Executive Commission meeting in May 2004.
After the cancellation of the tender, studies began in search of a
new model that aimed at meeting the military’s needs in a shorter
time and make more cost effective use of Turkey’s domestic capacity.
For this purpose, a new tender invitation was released on 10 February
2005.
Several defense companies applied to participate in the tender that
closed in December 2005.
Those companies include: Eurocopter with the Tiger helicopter,
the Italian Agusta company with the A-129 Mangusta, Russia’s
Rosoboronexport with the MI-28 Havoc, and the South African Denel
Company with the CSH-2 Rooivalk helicopter.
FRENCH PREFER ARMENIANS TO TURKISH PEOPLE
Dr. Nigun Gulcan argues that the French politicians abuse Armenian
issue and prefer Christian Armenians to Muslim Turkish people:
“France is one of the most radical secular country, however the French
policy towards Turkey is strictly based on Christian biases.
France supports Greece, Greek Cyprus and Armenia. France has
never supported Muslim Turkey. They see the world Christians and
non-Christians. Turkey’s EU memberhsih is being prevented by Armenian
and Cyprus issues. The Paris abuses the problems, instead of assisting
the regional countries. The French policians have no single word on
current issues, yet they prefer to discuss 100-years-old issues. They
do not conmen the Armenian occupation in caucasus but discuss the
events happened in the Ottoman years. Armenia does not recognise
Turkey’s and Azerbaijan’s national borders, yet France does not
see that”.

WAS IT GENOCIDE?
By Guenter Lewy
Jerusalem Post
May 14 2006
Armenians call the calamitous events of 1915-16 in the Ottoman Empire
the first genocide of the 20th century. Most Turks refer to the episode
as a wartime relocation made necessary by the treasonous conduct of
their Armenian minority.
The debate over what actually happened has been going on for almost
100 years; it crops up periodically in various parts of the world
when members of the Armenian diaspora push for recognition of the
Armenian genocide by their respective parliaments, and the Turkish
government warn of retaliation.
On September 29, 2005 the European Parliament in Strasbourg adopted a
resolution demanding that, as a condition of admission to the European
Union, Turkey acknowledge the killing of its Armenians during World
War I as an instance of genocide.
According to the Genocide Convention of 1948, intent is a necessary
condition of genocide, and most other definitions of this crime of
crimes similarly insist upon the centrality of malicious intent.
Hence the crucial question in this controversy is not the huge loss
of life in and by itself but rather whether the Young Turk regime
intentionally sought the deaths we know to have occurred.
Both sides agree that several hundred thousand men, women and children
were forced from their homes, and that during a harrowing trek over
mountains and through deserts, uncounted multitudes died of starvation
and disease, or were murdered.
To the victims it makes no difference whether they met their deaths
as a result of a carefully planned scheme of annihilation, in
consequence of a panicky reaction to a misjudged threat, or for any
other reason. It does, however, make a difference for the accuracy of
the historical record, not to mention the future of Turkish-Armenian
relations.
ARMENIANS and their supporters concede the absence of Turkish
documentary evidence to prove the responsibility of the Ottoman
government for the massacres, but cite the reports of foreign diplomats
and missionaries on the scene. Given the large number of deaths and
the observed complicity of local officials in the murders, it is not
surprising that many of these witnesses concluded the high death toll
was an intended outcome of the deportation process.
Still, well-informed as many foreign observers were about the events
unfolding before their eyes, their insight into the mind-set and real
intentions of the government in Istanbul was necessarily limited.
Indeed, to this day the inner workings of the Young Turk regime, and
especially the role of the triumvirate of Enver, Talaat and Djemal,
are understood only very inadequately.
Most Turks, too, misread the historical record. Quasi-official
historians speak of “so-called massacres,” or blame the deaths on
starvation and disease that are said to have afflicted a far larger
numbers of Turks.
And yet there exists an important difference between lives lost as
a result of natural causes such as famine and epidemics – blows of
fortune that afflicted Muslims and Christians alike – and deaths due
to deliberate killing.
It is undeniable that thousands of Armenians died at the hands of
their corrupt escorts and the Kurdish tribesmen who occupied their
route southward to Ottoman Syria.
CURRENTLY both sides in this controversy make their case by simplifying
a complex historical reality and ignoring crucial evidence that would
yield a more nuanced picture. Both parties also use heavy-handed
tactics to advance their cause and silence a full debate of the issues.
The Turkish government has applied diplomatic pressure and threats
and has harassed dissenting Turkish authors; Armenians accuse all
those who do not call the massacres a case of genocide of seeking to
appease the Turkish government.
In 1994 Armenians in France took the well-known Middle East scholar
Bernard Lewis to court and charged him with causing “grievous prejudice
to truthful memory” because he denied the accusation of genocide. The
court found against Lewis and imposed a token fine.
It is doubtful that contested historical questions are the legitimate
province of courts of law or parliaments. Armenians should recognize
that distinguished scholars of Ottoman history have questioned the
appropriateness of the genocide label for the tragic events of this
period, and should cease calling all those who question the Armenian
version of these occurrences “denialists” on a par with deniers of
the Holocaust. Turks must acknowledge the misdeeds of some of their
compatriots during World War I.
With so much that is unknown, both sides should step back from the
sterile was-it-genocide-or-not debate and instead seek a common pool
of reliable historical knowledge.
The writer is a professor emeritus of political science at the
University of Massachusetts and author most recently of The Armenian
Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide.
cid=1145961343282&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2 FShowFull

PERNOD WINS ARARAT RULING
Moscow Times
May 15 2006
Bloomberg
Pernod Ricard, maker of Chivas Regal and Martell cognac, won a ruling
from the Russian government upholding its rights to the Ararat cognac
brand, a mark of quality since the Soviet era, Vedomosti reported.
The Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks
ordered the Ararat Cognac Factory in St. Petersburg to stop using the
brand after Paris-based Pernod filed a complaint, the newspaper said,
citing copy of the agency’s ruling.
Pernod bought the rights to the Ararat cognac brand in Russia and
Armenia from the Armenian government “shortly after” Armenia sold its
St. Petersburg factory to Russian investors in 2002, Vedomosti said.

HARPER MAKING HIS MARK IN FOREIGN POLICY LANDSCAPE
by George Koch, For the Calgary Herald
The Calgary Herald (Alberta)
May 14, 2006 Sunday
Final Edition
When the Danish Muhammad cartoons controversy erupted in early
February, the days-old Conservative government’s equivocal response
disappointed those hoping for a tough answer to terrorist apologists
and Islamist radicalism. Would this become the default mode of a weak
minority government?
Barely three months later, it’s looking like a mere opening stumble
by a not yet fully staffed government. Since then, the Conservatives
have made a series of moves — some small and symbolic, others big
and important — that add up to a sharp departure from the indecision,
inconsistency and political correctness of the Liberals.
The latest item triggered outsized controversy. Last month, the
government issued a statement commemorating the Armenian genocide,
which peaked in 1915. Noting the Armenian people’s “terrible suffering
and loss of life” from Turkish actions that Canada officially considers
a “crime against humanity,” the four-paragraph statement was signed
by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
It barely made Canadian news, but it quickly outraged the Turkish
government, which recalled its ambassador and is expected to boycott
joint air force exercises later this year.
Whatever one’s views on the Armenians’ tragic past, Harper’s
statement hardly suggested timidity. Indeed, since mid-February, the
Conservatives have cut a veritable swath through the foreign policy
landscape, including:
n Harper’s visit in mid-March to Canadian troops fighting in
Afghanistan;
n Suspension in late March of the $25 million in annual funding to the
Palestinian Authority, after the terrorist group Hamas came to power;
n Adding the Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers to Canada’s list of prohibited
terrorist organizations, which the Liberals had refused to do;
n The plan, announced in the recent budget, to arm Canada’s border
guards (also after years of Liberal refusal);
n The increased defence budget;
n Casting a March UN vote in favour of Israel;
n Condemning Iran’s president after he called for Israel’s
annihilation;
n A more favourable attitude towards the United States, culminating
in the recent agreement on Canada’s softwood lumber exports;
n The acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide.
“We’re thinking hard about foreign policy, partly because there’s a
lot of interest among Conservative party members in foreign policy,
including earlier policy resolutions,” says one senior government
official, who spoke to the Herald on a background basis.
Some of these are now becoming government policy. For example, the
Conservative party in 2004 resolved to recognize the Armenian genocide.
Harper’s showing up in Afghanistan — at considerable physical risk
— wasn’t a mere stunt. He’s been in the thick of nearly all the
recent moves. According to a recent article in the Western Standard,
following the evidently rigged elections in Belarus in March, Harper
also over-rode Foreign Affairs bureaucrats and personally toughened
Canada’s official response.
“We understand that Canada is not some island on which we can live
in splendid and peaceful isolation,” Harper told the House of Commons
in his response to the Throne Speech in early April.
“We want Canada to be a player, at home and abroad, on the great
challenges of the day.” In his speech to the troops in Afghanistan,
Harper referred specifically to the Canadians killed in the World
Trade Center atrocity on 9/11.
The Conservative government is reorganizing Canada’s foreign policy
around two concepts: that foreign policy must advance Canada’s
interests, and that it should promote four fundamental principles.
Described in the Throne Speech, they are freedom, democracy, the rule
of law and human rights. The new foreign policy concept, and the way
it’s being carried out, almost sounds like an emerging Harper doctrine.
“Foreign policy is what we do outside the country to influence the
behaviour of foreign actors,” says the government official. “It’s a
tool, because we intend to get something out of it — like improved
relations with the U.S.” One beneficial outcome, he argues, was the
recent softwood lumber deal.
It’s a sharp departure from the Liberals’ vision of foreign policy
which, like that of former U.S. president Bill Clinton, seemed driven
primarily by the desire to accommodate various domestic interests. A
classic example was senior Liberals appearing at fundraisers for the
Tamil Tigers’ domestic front group.
In addition, former prime minister Paul Martin’s international approach
was so scattered it became virtually ineffective. A Conservative
official notes incredulously that Martin’s otherwise all-powerful
prime minister’s office (PMO) had no foreign policy section. Martin
PMO officials considered foreign affairs just politics and spent
their time “chasing headlines.”
At its worst, the Liberal approach was largely about striking
fashionable poses in highly visible settings — such as Martin
cavorting with Bono, or calling for relief of African national debts
— while doing little or nothing. “Soft power” in practice was as
oxymoronic as the words suggested.
The Conservatives are intent on concentrating Canada’s middle power
resources on a limited set of achievable objectives. Government
officials describe it as a “team effort.”
Day-to-day activity is handled by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter
MacKay and his department. Stockwell Day, foreign affairs critic in
opposition and now minister of Public Safety, is involved in files
such as banning the Tamil Tigers and arming Canada’s border guards.
The prime minister “maintains a keen interest” in foreign policy and
runs big-ticket items affecting Canada’s direction in the world.
Harper’s key officials include Ian Brodie, chief of staff; Mark
Cameron, manager of policy; and Keith Fountain, Cameron’s policy
adviser for foreign affairs and national security.
It meshes with the Harper government’s broader campaign to advance
the Conservative agenda in small steps, equal parts symbolism and
substance, that don’t require legislation (the budget being a major
exception), avoiding open confrontation with the opposition parties.
It’s been dubbed incrementalism.
Incremental, yes, but not necessarily uncontroversial. The statement on
Armenia may have repeated concepts introduced in previous parliamentary
resolutions. The prime minister’s imprimatur, however, was new.
The Armenian genocide, in which 600,000 to 1.5 million Armenians died
at the hands of Turkish army units and government officials during the
First World War, may seem like a 90-year-old historical curiosity. But
in the Middle East, it’s fraught with meaning. Armenia is the world’s
oldest officially Christian nation, having maintained its culture
and religion amid centuries of expansion by Islam. Today Armenia
is a struggling country with mostly Muslim neighbours, including
totalitarian and soon-to-be nuclear-armed Iran.
Turkey continues to deny what it did to the Armenians was genocide.
Turkey’s foreign ministry has accused Harper of displaying a “gravely
prejudiced attitude.”
Turkey is also where the Muslim caliphate was dissolved after the
First World War, and which al-Qaeda and other groups are fighting
to re-establish.
Harper’s comments are very likely circulating among the chat rooms,
websites and e-mails of radical Islamists the world over, and they
are certain to regard them as provocative.
Canadian government officials say they do not think the issue will
increase the risks to Harper, or Canada. “The radical Islamists
already want to kill the PM,” notes one. “And Canada is already on
al-Qaeda’s top five list (of potential target countries).”
Meanwhile, the emerging Harper doctrine will continue to flesh
itself out. Reportedly, Harper will soon deliver a major speech on
Afghanistan. Some believe he may press China to improve its planning
and co-operation concerning anticipated pandemics such as the bird
flu. Canada will likely continue to push reform of the UN.
The government might list additional groups as banned terrorist
organizations, or move to expedite deportations of known criminals
and bogus refugee claimants with possible terrorist ties.
Thanks to better relations with the U.S., American authorities might
allow Canada Customs to station officers at U.S. airports to pre-clear
home-bound Canadians (as U.S. Customs does at Canadian airports).
Although most Canadians don’t seem to have noticed the Harper doctrine,
at the prime minister’s current foreign policy pace, it’s unlikely
to remain obscure for much longer.
George Koch is a Calgary-based freelance writer. More of his articles
can be read at his weblog,

CONFRONT THE FACTS OF A LONG-AGO MASSACRE
Edmonton Journal (Alberta)
May 14, 2006 Sunday
Final Edition
Whether or not Prime Minister Stephen Harper was diplomatically wise
to acknowledge the 1915 mass killing of Armenians as a genocide may
be debatable. The fact that the annihilation of as many as 600,000
Armenians took place, and that it was the result of deliberate
decisions of the Ottoman Empire during the First World War, is not.
Harper cannot be faulted for wishing to put an end to the international
pretence that the word “genocide” does not apply, and that the Turkish
government of the time was not morally responsible.
What this 90-year-old horror has to do with modern Turks, and modern
Turkey, is not clear — in the same way that it is not clear why modern
residents of Balkan states take personally what their ancestors are
accused of doing from time to time.
But if we are to learn from history, we must make sure we remember
it — all of it — accurately, whether we like what it says about
our forebears or not.
The facts of the Armenian tragedy are rooted in war. Reacting to
evidence that Russia was recruiting Armenian subjects of the Ottoman
Empire to fight against it, an estimated 1.7 million Armenians were
sent into internal exile, and historians say at least a third died
of starvation in the desert or were killed by Turkish troops.
Yes, the Canadian government should do its best to get along with the
countries of the world, and to respect their various sensitivities,
just as we expect them to treat us in return. But that shouldn’t mean
having to accept as truth something that isn’t.

ABRAHAM RETAINS IBF MIDDLWEIGHT CROWN
by ZWICKAU, Germany, May 14 2006
Agence France Presse — English
May 13, 2006 Saturday 10:16 PM GMT
Armenia’s Arthur Abraham retained his IBF middleweight title on
Saturday beating Ghana’s Kofi Jantuah on a unanimous points decision.
The 26-year-old Abraham, who has held the belt since December 2005,
was on top for most of the 12 rounds and is now unbeaten in 21 fights,
winning 17 inside the distance.
The three judges scored the fight 115-112, 116-111, 117-109.

ARMENIA LAUNCHES PLANT TO RECYCLE SOVIET MISSILE FUEL
Agence France Presse — English
May 13, 2006 Saturday 2:03 AM GMT
Armenia late Friday inaugurated a plant that will recycle toxic
components of the fuel used by Soviet-era missiles that remain on
the territory of this Caucasus republic.
The 1.2-million-euro (1.55-million-dollar) plant, located some 80
kilometers from the capital Yerevan, is funded by the Organization
for Security and Cooperation on Europe (OSCE), the United States,
Finland, Canada and Germany.
“This plant is extremely important for the country’s environment. We
inherited the fuel’s toxic elements from the Soviet Union, and
they are dangerous not only for the environment, but also for the
population,” said Armenian defense minister Serj Sargsian, who attended
the inauguration.
The fuel “has become more dangerous now, as the tanks in which it is
stored have aged,” he said.
The plant will recycle 872 tons of toxic substances, mostly nitrogen
acid and nitrogen oxide, by August of next year, said its head, major
Viktor Vukhrer. The fuel’s components will be recycled into fertilizer.
“If 100 cubic meters of the substance leaked into the environment, all
life forms would die in a radius of two kilometers, and there would
be long-term soil and water pollution in a radius of 20 kilometers,”
Vukhrer said.
OSCE general secretary Marc Perrin de Brichambaut said international
experts would monitor the plant, the recycling process and the
environmental impact.
He said the plant was an example of cooperation between the
organization and Armenia, which could inspire other projects in
the future.
“This project will serve as an example for similar projects,” Perrin
de Brichambaut said at the inauguration ceremony.
The plant was built following an agreement signed in 2005 between
Armenia and the OSCE.

RETRIEVAL OF BLACK SEA PLANE WRECK RECORDERS TO START MAY 16 – MINISTER
RIA Novosti, Russia
May 13, 2006
MOSCOW, May 13 (RIA Novosti) – The retrieval of flight recorders
from the Armenian Airbus airliner that crashed off Russia’s Black Sea
coast last week, killing all 113 people on board, will start May 16,
Russia’s transport minister said Saturday.
Igor Levitin said special equipment, which is currently in the port of
Novorossiisk, would be delivered to the scene shortly. The equipment
will be ready for the effort Monday, he said.

BAD WEATHER CAUSES DELAY IN ARMENIAN JET’S BLACK BOXES LIFTING
by Viktor Zhilyakov, Dmitry Nezdorovin
ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 13, 2006 Saturday 04:54 PM EST
Bad weather on the Black Sea has forced officials steering a recovery
of flight recorders of the Armenian Airlines A-320 jet from the seabed
to revise the operation schedule.
The jet crashed in the small hours of May 3 while on a maneuver for
landing at Adler airport, located in the coastal area.
A traffic controller at the seaport of the beach city of Sochi told
Itar-Tass the special sea craft Navigator had to suspend a search
in the area of jet crash six kilometers away from the coast and to
return to the port.
The operation was suspended at 17:00 hours Moscow time, but earlier
reports indicated the Navigator’s crew had managed to obtain the
first television image of the flight recorders lying at the depth of
496 meters.
The images were produced with the aid of a top-notch research complex
Kalmar.
At the time of reporting, the area had northwest wind 15 meters per
second to 17 meters per second strong and a moderate swell of the sea
(3 to 4 points on the Douglas scale).
The Kalmar equipment was provided by the department for salvage and
emergency operations based in the port city of Novorossisk.
The designer of the complex, the Russian corporation Tetis-Pro,
made the Kalmar for the Russian Navy. When the A-320 crashed, the
complex, which includes a sonic depth-tester having the functions of
a side-looking sonar, was still in the phase of testing.
The Kalmar is capable of tracking down objects at the depths of down
to 600 meters.
Other ships engaged in the recovery operation also returned to
Sochi port.