PLATVOET PROPOSED FORMING WORKING GROUP WITH PARTICIPATION OF ARMENIA, KARABAKH AND AZERBAIJAN
PanARMENIAN.Net
29.06.2006 14:53 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ At a meeting with Armenian Speaker Tigran Torosyan
PACE Rapporteur for the Missing in Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan,
Dutch MP Leo Platvoet discussed the outcomes of his latest visit
to Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Torosyan thanked Platvoet for
meeting during the visit with NKR NGOs dealing with the affairs of
the missing and is committed to not politicizing the issue. Platvoet
noted it would be very important for his mission to visit Nagorno
Karabakh and Abkhazia. The PACE Rapporteur suggested that Tigran
Torosyan provide him a lit of missing Armenians to organize search for
them in Azerbaijan and “find those, who is, maybe, still alive.” To
promote search for the missing, Platvoet proposed to form a working
group with participation of all parties under the patronage of the
Red Cross. The Speaker was ready to assist in drawing a report aimed
at solving that important human problem, reports the Press Service
of the NA of Armenia.

SHIRAK MARZ IS DEPRIVED OF CROP
A1+
[12:37 pm] 29 June, 2006
The sowing areas of Shirak marz have greatly suffered because of the
recent hail and aridity. On the whole, about 23 communities suffered
because of the hail falling last week.
About 1250 hectares arable lands suffered by 30%, 150 lands – by 50%
and 70 lands – by 70% and so on. There is no hope for recovery. In
some cases the representatives of the marzpetaran (regional council)
advised to use unripe crop as fodder.
The observation of the Shirak marz corresponding committee is still
under way. According to the specialists’ calculations the total harm
of the region is about 300 million AMD by now. Romik Manoukyan,
Shirak marzpet claims that the aridity was preferable to the hail
as the harm would have been partial in that case and they could have
saved part of the harvest.
According to the marzpetaran the government is already aware of
the situation. He maintains that their foremost task is to provide
the peasants with seeds without any discrimination, that’s to say
rendering equal assistance.
The current situation signals to the necessity of having anti-hail
system. Romik Manoukyan noted on this score that the testing of the
systems has been under way since last year and Shirak marz will be
one of the first regions where anti-hail systems will be located in
case they give positive results.
TV Company “Tsayg,” Gyumri

COASTAL AREAS OF RIVER DEBED ARE BEING RESTORED
A1+
[01:02 pm] 29 June, 2006
The restoring work of the breast-wall of the river Debed on the way
to Engels district in the city of Alaverdi has initiated since June
11 in the framework of the 2006 environmental programs.
6 million AMD was assigned in this connection in the framework of
the 2006 environment protection and population health recovery of
Alaverdi. The restoration is carried out by “The Mikayelyans and
Their Friends” LTD. 8 workers are employed on the site to implement
the restoration and they will get piece-rate payment. The brigade
will get 16 000 AMD per 1 square breast-wall.
TV Company “Ankyun+3,” Alaverdi.

AN INTERVAL IS ANTICIPATED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS
A1+
[01:05 pm] 29 June, 2006
The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair Mathew Bryza announced the principles
of settlement of the Karabakh issue discussed by the presidents of
Armenia and Azerbaijan.
These principles include withdrawal of Armenian troops from the
territories, where they were stationed, economic assistance to Karabakh
and communication, as well as a referendum on the status of Nagorno
Karabakh at some stage.
“For the first time a co-chair presented systematically all the
information that is possible to get from various sources,” Vahram
Atanesyan, Chair of the Committee of External Relations of the NKR
National Assembly, said to the Karabakh Open. He emphasized that
the proposals of the American co-chair are not in the interests of
Karabakh. According to Atanesyan, opening the cards is an effort to
make pressure on the parties. “Otherwise, the presidents might reach
agreement. Besides, agreement without the engagement of the government
of NKR is impossible,” said Vahram Atanesyan. “Unfortunately,
it seems to me that the principles of settlement of the Karabakh
issue, “revealed” by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair Mathew Bryza, are
addressed to the Armenian public because they are in the interests
of Azerbaijan,” said Vahram Atanesyan. “In particular, the return
of territories and uncertainty over the time of settlement of the
problem of status,” said Vahram Atanesyan.
“I think opening the cards at the moment means there are major
controversies and hurdles in the process of settlement. Moreover, these
hurdles are impossible to take. Therefore, the cards were opened in
the summer of 2006, which was said to be an expedient year for the
settlement of the Karabakh problem. It means that the talks did not
produce significant results,” Davit Babayan, political scientist,
said to the Karabakh Open.
“The logic of Azerbaijan and certain international organizations,
namely the return of territories and holding a referendum at a period
which is uncertain is unacceptable for the Armenian party. Some
liberated areas have the same role for the security of Karabakh as the
independence. Real independence is impossible without these areas. For
instance, 85 percent of Karabakh rivers, as well as the rivers Vorotan
and Arpa nourishing the Sevan start from the region of Karvachar. If
this area is not controlled by NKR, Karabakh may undergo ecological
terror. Even if the independence of Karabakh is recognized. However,
Azerbaijan rejects this as well, and insists on maintaining the status
of Karabakh in an indefinite period of time. If the developments follow
this path, it may be a powerful psychological shock for the people
of NKR, and it will be difficult to get over it. It is absolutely
absurd for a winner to take such a step,” said Davit Babayan.
“What is more, both the independence and autonomy of Karabakh
contain equal risk for Azerbaijan, because in both cases the other
ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan, namely the Talish and Lezgis will
demand similar rights. And this could lead to the dissolution of the
Azerbaijani statehood,” noted the political scientist.
The “proposals” revealed by the new American co-chair of the OSCE
Minsk Group Mathew Bryza did not find support in Karabakh. The chair
of the Committee of External Relations of the NKR National Assembly
Vahram Atanesyan, Democracy faction, Gagik Petrosyan, representative
of the second political party in the parliament Azat Hayrenik, and the
opposition announced that the package discussed by the presidents of
Azerbaijan and Armenia is against the vital interests of Karabakh. The
proposals on returning territories and holding a referendum in an
indefinite period are unacceptable. “The impression is that the
revelations were addressed to the Armenian party because they are
totally in the interests of Azerbaijan,” said Vahram Atanesyan.
At the same time, they think in Karabakh that Bryza’s revelations
may be a swansong of the package proposal.
Political scientist Davit Babayan thinks that since the proposals
have been published, the presidents will not discuss them, and a
necessity for new approaches will occur.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SERGE SARGSYAN, “IT WOULD BE WISE TO MAKE ALL THE DOCUMENTS PUBLIC”
A1+
[03:10 pm] 29 June, 2006
“Bryza had better make the documents adopted during the Qui West
negotiation and after it public instead of his own interpretation,”
Serge Sargsyan, RA Defense Minister told the journalists today while
commenting on OSCE Minsk group newly appointed American Co-Chair
Mettew Bryza’s “discoveries.”
“There is some misunderstanding here. The OSCE Minsk group
Co-Chairs call on the sides not to make the documents public to
avoid emotional outcome whereas they do the contrary themselves,”
noted Serge Sargsyan. He announced that the conflict settlement is
the two presidents’ priority and the Co-Chairs will accept whatever
the two presidents decided.
According to the Defense Minister the publication of the Karabakh
conflict negotiation details will not lead to the war relaunch. “I
don’t thing that the current situation can lead to any war. There
are no preconditions for war.”

STATEMENT BY THE MINSK GROUP CO-CHAIRS
Lragir.am
29 June 06
TO THE OSCE PERMANENT COUNCIL
Vienna, June 22, 2006
Mr. Chairmen,
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In November last year the Minsk Group Co-Chairs reported to this
Council that the two sides in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict were
poised to make a transition from negotiating to decision-making
and that a historic breakthrough in the settlement of the conflict
was possible in 2006. During the past seven months, we intensified
our mediation efforts and worked hard to achieve the agreement of
both sides on basic principles for a settlement. We visited Baku
and Yerevan three times together and several more times separately,
organized two meetings of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Armenia
and Azerbaijan and two summits between Presidents Kocharian and Aliyev
– first in Rambouillet in February and then in Bucharest in early June.
For the first time since 1997, when the current format of the
Co-Chairmanship of the Minsk Group was established, a joint Mission
of Representatives of the Co-Chair countries at the Deputy Foreign
Minister level traveled to the region in May in order to make clear to
the presidents of both countries that 2006 is the necessary window of
opportunity for reaching an agreement on Nagrono-Karabakh. In fact,
the delegation of Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigoriy Karasin,
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried, and high-ranking
French diplomat Pierre Morel – representing French Political Director
Stanislaus de Laboulaye – told the two Presidents that our three
countries expected them to take advantage of this opportunity by
reaching an agreement on core principles for a settlement at their
Bucharest summit in early June.
Our deputy ministers told the two Presidents that an agreement on basic
principles now, before the July G8 Summit in St. Petersburg,
would secure broad international support and a high level of
financial assistance for postconflict reconstruction and peacekeeping
activities. We stressed – as always – the belief of our nations and,
more widely, of the international community that the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict can be resolved in no other way than a peaceful one. Moreover,
we stressed that both leaders need to prepare their publics for peace
and not for war.
Mr. Chairman,
Our deputy ministers proposed to Presidents Aliyev and Kocharian a set
of core principles that we believe are fair, balanced, workable,
and that could pave the way for the two sides to draft a far-reaching
settlement agreement. We continue to believe in these principles, and
we urge the Presidents to embrace them as the basis for an agreement.
Unfortunately, the Presidents chose not to reach such an agreement
in Bucharest. As mediators in this process, we will not breach the
confidentiality of their sensitive diplomatic dialogue, as we continue
to hope that they will reach an agreement. At this juncture, though,
it is our responsibility to you, Mr. Chairman, to this Council that
has provided the funding for a very intensive series of negotiations,
to the international community, and – perhaps most importantly –
to the publics in Armenia and Azerbaijan, to acquaint you with the
basic principles that we have put on the table for the consideration
of the two Presidents.
We note that the principles the Co-Chair countries proposed to the two
Presidents were not developed in a vacuum, but follow on to nine years
of detailed proposals that have been advanced by our predecessors. Even
though those proposals were not accepted by the parties, that work
of our predecessors gave us important insights and foundations. Our
approach has been a modified one: we have not tried to solve all
aspects of the conflict in one phase. Instead, our principles seek
to achieve a major degree of progress but defer some very difficult
issues to the future and envision further negotiations. In sum, they
try to solve – in a practical, balanced way – what is immediately
solvable. These principles include the phased redeployment of Armenian
troops from Azerbaijani territories around Nagorno-Karabakh, with
special modalities for Kelbajar and Lachin districts. Demilitarization
of those territories would follow. A referendum or population vote
would be agreed, at an unspecified future date, to determine the
final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh. The sides would commit to
further negotiations to define the timing and modalities of such
a referendum or population vote. Certain interim arrangements for
Nagorno-Karabakh would allow for interaction with providers of
international assistance. An international peacekeeping force would
be deployed. A joint commission would be created to implement the
agreement. International financial assistance would be made available
for demining, reconstruction, and resettlement of internally displaced
persons in the formerly occupied territories and the war-affected
regions of Nagorno-Karabakh. The sides would renounce the use or
threat of use of force, and international and bilateral security
guarantees and assurances would be put in place.
We note with respect to the idea of a referendum or population
vote to determine the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh that
such a vote would be the product of a negotiated agreement between
the two sides. Suitable pre-conditions for such a vote would have
to be achieved so that the vote would take place in a non-coercive
environment in which well-informed citizens have had ample opportunity
to consider their positions after a vigorous debate in the public
arena.
Mr. Chairman,
This is what we have proposed to the two Presidents, but they failed to
agree. Nonetheless, we have heard both sides say repeatedly that
they have never before been so close to an agreement. It would be
a tragically wasted opportunity for the two Presidents to let this
window of opportunity close in 2006 without even the basic principles
in place for a future peace agreement for Nagorno-Karabakh. As you
know, election cycles are approaching, first in Armenia and then in
Azerbaijan during 2007-2008. We have seen before the negative effect
that national elections can have on negotiations, and we continue
to believe that now is the time for the two Presidents to summon the
political will to take a courageous step forward together toward peace.
Mr. Chairman,
As Co-Chairs, we have reached the limits of our creativity in the
identification, formulation, and finalization of these principles. We
do not believe additional alternatives advanced by the mediators
through additional meetings with the sides will produce a different
result. We hope that the Permanent Council will join us in urging
the parties to the conflict to reach an agreement as soon as possible
based on the core principles we have recommended. If the two sides are
unable to agree on those principles we have put forward, we believe it
is now contingent upon them to work together to reach an alternative
agreement that both find acceptable. We remain ready to assist. As
mediators, however, we cannot make the difficult decisions for the
parties. We think the parties would be well-served at this point by
allowing their publics to engage in a robust discussion of the many
viewpoints on these issues. We are confident that neither society wants
renewed conflict, and we urge the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan
to work with their publics and to work with each other to formulate an
agreement on core principles that both find acceptable. Ultimately, it
is the two sides that will be held accountable by their peoples and by
the international community if their actions lead to war and not peace.
Mr. Chairman,
We see no point right now in continuing the intensive shuttle diplomacy
we have engaged in over the past several months. We also see no point
in initiating further presidential meetings until the sides demonstrate
enough political will to overcome their remaining differences. Of
course, the Co-Chairs will remain available to both parties to serve
faithfully and impartially as mediators. Acting in complete unity among
the mediators, we have delivered a product reflecting our best efforts,
and we strongly believe that it is now time for the two Presidents to
take the initiative for achieving a breakthrough in the settlement
process. It is the only way to secure the positive results already
achieved through the last two years of negotiations, in order not to
restart them later from scratch. We will remain vigilant. We will
continue our analysis and close consultations among ourselves in
our unified and effective framework, in our continuing capacity as
Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group, supported by Ambassador Kasprzyk and
his team. We will be ready to reengage if indeed the parties decide
to pursue the talks with the political will that has thus far been
lacking.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we would like to express our sincere
gratitude to the Chairman in Office, Minister de Gucht, whose close
interest and constant attention to the issues of the Nagorno-Karabakh
settlement, including his introductory remarks before the last meeting
of two Presidents in Bucharest, have contributed greatly to our work
in the first half of 2006.

Ottoman Documentary Cancelled in US
By Zaman, Istanbul
Published: Wednesday, June 28, 2006
zaman.com
The History Channel, which broadcasts in a number of countries
worldwide, abruptly cancelled the scheduled showing of a documentary
on the Ottoman State. The documentary titled `Ottoman Empire: The War
Machine’ scheduled to be shown on June 22-23-24 was cancelled without
a prior notice or explanation. Turkish viewers, who tuned in the
program’s scheduled hour were astonished. Those who complained to the
network about the sudden cancellation were told: `The montage wasn’t
ready yet.’ Immediately following this statement, it was announced the
documentary would be shown on July 24. The DVD of the documentary was
on sale on the channel’s web site when the statement was made.
Internet sales of the DVD were later discontinued. After the
scheduled broadcast date of July 24 was announced online, it was
replaced by the notice: `We apologize, but the program scheduled for
this hour will not be shown’ The film documents the stages of the
Ottoman State from its rise to decline.

ARMENIAN, AZERI LEADERS ‘AGREED TO KARABAKH REFERENDUM’
By Emil Danielyan
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
June 27 2006
The presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan have accepted the idea of
enabling the people of Nagorno-Karabakh to decide their status in
a referendum but disagree on other, less significant issues, the
Armenian Foreign Ministry said late Monday.
The ministry also for the first time openly blamed Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliev for the collapse of his last peace talks with
his Armenian counterpart Robert Kocharian held in Bucharest on June
4-5. It warned that Yerevan could pull out of the negotiating process
if Baku refuses to sign up to a framework peace accord proposed by
the American, French and Russian mediators.
Key principles of that accord were revealed to RFE/RL by the new U.S.
co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, Matthew Bryza, late last week.
Bryza confirmed that it calls for the holding of a referendum in
Karabakh after the liberation of Armenian-occupied territories in
Azerbaijan surrounding the disputed enclave.
Yerevan’s reaction to the move was negative, with President Robert
Kocharian saying through a spokesman that Bryza disclosed only a part
of the proposed peace deal and threatening to publicize it in full.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry appears to have done just that,
indicating in a written statement that the mediators also believe
Karabakh should retain an overland link with Armenia and remain under
Armenian control before the referendum. Still, the ministry was clearly
more positive about the U.S. official’s remarks. “The co-chairs have,
for the first time, affirmed that the people of Nagorno-Karabakh
shall determine their own future status through a referendum,” read
its statement.
“Those items over which the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
continue to disagree do not include a referendum; that concept has
been agreed to by the presidents,” it said. “The area of disagreement
between the presidents has to do with the sequence in which the
consequences of the military conflict are removed.”
Aliev and Kocharian reportedly disagreed, among other things, on a
time frame for Armenian withdrawal from Kelbajar, one of the seven
occupied Azerbaijani districts sandwiched between Karabakh and Armenia,
during their previous meeting held at the Rambouillet castle outside
Paris in February.
“In an attempt to resolve this remaining area of disagreement, a
proposal was made by the co-chairs after Rambouillet. This proposal
was accepted by Armenia in Bucharest. Azerbaijan rejected it,” the
Foreign Ministry said without elaborating.
Aliev’s apparent acceptance of the referendum option, which sparked
unusually upbeat statements by the mediators late last year and early
this, is at odds with his repeated public statements ruling out any
possibility of Karabakh’s de jure secession from Azerbaijan. While
confirming the veracity of the peace deal outlined by Bryza,
Azerbaijani officials say they are only ready to grant Karabakh a
status of autonomy within Azerbaijan.
Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov reiterated this on Tuesday. “This
could be an autonomy like [the Azerbaijani exclave of] Nakhichevan,
[the Russian autonomous republics of] Tatarstan and Bashkiria and
other entities,” he said, according to Day.az.
The Foreign Ministry in Yerevan made it clear, however, that
Karabakh’s return under Azerbaijani control is non-negotiable for
the Armenian side and said Baku must instead go along with the Minsk
Group plan. “Armenia finds that the basic principles, overall, on
the table today remain a serious basis for continuing negotiations,”
it said. “Armenia is prepared to continue on that basis to negotiate
with Azerbaijan; Armenia believes that Azerbaijan’s wavering on these
principles is a serious obstacle to progress in the negotiations. If
this policy continues, Armenia will insist that Azerbaijan conduct
direct negotiations with Nagorno-Karabakh.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Volunteer Corps
62 Hanrapetutian St. Apt 108
Yerevan, Armenia
Contact: Anoush Tatevossian
Tel: (374 10) 540037
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:
Volunteers’ Efforts Go Beyond Their Capabilities
YEREVAN, June 26, 2006. A protest three weeks ago in front of the Russian
Embassy in Yerevan marked Armenia’s first public condemnation of the growing
xenophobia in Russia towards the Armenian Diaspora and other immigrant
groups living there.
The June 5th protest, in response to an escalating number of crimes and
murders over the past 6 months, prompted President Robert Kocharian to step
up pressure on Moscow on Friday, June 16 to increase efforts to quell such
attacks and take preventative measures. The protest represented a theme
of growing frustration in Armenians within the Republic and worldwide
regarding the issue.
A theme of lesser notice at the protest, however, was the growing role of
the Armenian Diaspora’s volunteer efforts in their homeland. The Armenian
Volunteer Corps (AVC), an organization that brings Diasporans to Armenia to
volunteer throughout the country, was a main organizer of the event and
represented a majority of the protestors. Volunteers expressed their
disgust of the events in Russia by standing in line in front of the embassy
with anti-xenophobia signs and by giving interviews with the media.
Since January, the AVC has brought 22 volunteers to Armenia, many of them
young people coming to the country for the first time to assume various
roles including teaching English in villages, working with organizations in
Yerevan, and helping out at orphanages and with reforestation efforts.
Volunteers also have the opportunity to take Armenian language lessons and
travel to Armenia’s churches and historic sites through the Birthright
Armenia organization, which supports the volunteers with financial
assistance.
Past volunteers have come to Armenia from countries all around the world,
however the majority of them are from the US, Canada, and Western Europe.
Since the AVC’s founding in 2000, over 100 volunteers have given their
services to Armenia. “I’ve been able to lend my capabilities to different
organizations and people here, and in return I’ve gotten to know my homeland
like my own family,” said Nick Bazarian, a volunteer from Vermont who came
to Armenia in February after deciding to take a semester off from college.
For those who work with the volunteers, benefits go further than the amount
of work or service the volunteers accomplish. According to AVC’s director
Anoush Tatevossian, “Sometimes it’s the ideas they bring and the
interactions they have with people that ultimately have a greater impact on
the development of society. Their experiences outside of Armenia are shared
with people in day-to-day interactions and help people think outside the
box.”
The June 5th protest was one such example of this as the volunteers
organized themselves according to past protest experiences in the US and
Canada, forming a line in front of the embassy and equipping themselves with
signs and ready voices. The protesters then marched to the Armenian Foreign
ministry where they remained for 45 minutes. Civic actions such as this
protest have proved a success with the recent discussions between Kocharian
and the Kremlin.
Open protests of this kind in Armenia are generally rare, unattended, and
usually unorganized without sponsorship of the state. Protests are also
generally reactive rather than proactive, with people taking action after
the fact rather than before it happens, thus limiting the potential to
create influence. Noted protest organizer Arsen Kharatian, “These
volunteers come to Armenia with the intentions of physically helping their
homeland, but they end up influencing people and institutions in ways they
don’t always realize. They are a unique and positive resource for
Armenians.”

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 28, 2006
His Holiness Karekin II Completes Pontifical Visit to Istanbul
His Holiness Karekin II, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians,
having completed his first Pontifical Visit to Istanbul, returned to the
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin in the early morning hours of June 28. The
seven-day visit included a two day fraternal visit to the Ecumenical
Patriarch, followed by five days with the Armenian community of Istanbul and
the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople.
Although His Holiness’ flight arrived in Yerevan in the middle of the night,
waiting for him in the Mother Cathedral of Holy Etchmiadzin at 4:00 AM, were
hundreds of faithful who had come to welcome him home. His Holiness’
procession was escorted into the Mother Cathedral under the singing of the
`Hrashapar’ hymn. Standing before the Holy Altar of Descent, the Catholicos
of All Armenians offered prayers of thanks to heaven and thereafter conveyed
the unforgettable and warm impressions from his pontifical visit to all
those present. His Holiness Karekin II joyfully reflected on the
enthusiastic reception he received from the Armenian community of Istanbul,
as expression of their love and devotion to the Holy Armenian Apostolic
Church and the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin.
His Holiness stated, `Glory and thanksgiving to God. We return from our
pontifical visit to our sons and daughters in Constantinople with a content
heart. Our soul was filled with joy to personally see and meet our faithful
children, their enthusiastic devoted faith, and their patriotic spirit. We
communed with 600 years of history and treasures of the Armenian
Patriarchate of Constantinople.’
The Pontiff of All Armenians stated with contentment that the Armenian
community of Istanbul, a community that lives, breathes and speaks Armenian,
is active today with a vibrant national life. The community has 39
churches, 17 Armenian schools and many institutions, the largest of which is
the Holy All-Savior National Hospital. His Holiness also fondly recalled
his meetings with Armenian intellectuals and youth of Istanbul.
As the visit of His Holiness was widely covered by the Armenian and Turkish
press and media in Turkey, His Holiness spoke of the press conference
convened in Istanbul on Sunday, June 25, following the Pontifical Divine
Liturgy, during which the Armenian Genocide was discussed. (The full text
of the press conference will be available tomorrow on the website of the
Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, ). In reply to the
concerns about the prospect that His Holiness’ statements on the Armenian
Genocide could negatively affect the attitude of the Turkish authorities
towards the Armenians of Turkey, the Catholicos stated, `We do not believe
that our thoughts and words can affect the attitude of the authorities
towards our Armenians in Istanbul, because we never expressed hatred or
enmity, we simply stated the reality and the truth. Taking into account the
process of democratization, which the Turkish authorities desire to achieve
in their country, we also do not believe that extremist nationalistic forces
will succeed in sowing hatred and enmity toward the Armenians or other
minorities living in Turkey.’
His Holiness continued, stating that as many countries have recognized the
Genocide of the Armenians, so too must Turkey recognize the Genocide, for
which there exists no need for deliberations.
Regarding the protests that had been organized in Istanbul during his visit,
noting that the Turkish authorities characterized them as the `actions of
extremist groups’, His Holiness emphasized that in no way did they diminish
his impressions from the trip. Due to the unprecedented security measures
which were implemented, they did not obstruct the activities of the
Pontifical Visit and generally remained unnoticed by the delegation.
Just before daybreak in Holy Etchmiadzin, as His Holiness concluded his
remarks, he once again expressed his appreciation to the Armenian Patriarch
of Constantinople and the faithful people of Istanbul for the warm
reception, and offered his prayers for the stability and vibrancy of the
Armenian Patriarchate. The Pontiff of All Armenians also warmly expressed
his thanks to all those present who had waited all night long to greet him
upon his return to Armenia.
From: Baghdasarian