BABACAN RELAXES WITH ERDOGAN-GUL SUPPORT
By Suleyman Kurt
Zaman, Turkey
zaman.com
Oct 13 2005
“We have taken a long and rocky road,” is the phrase widely repeated by
the public as to how Turkey will conduct the membership negotiations
with the European Union (EU). The first official assessment on the
subject came from the Chief Negotiator Ali Babacan as he underlined
the same point rather than discussing technical details: “At the end
of the road, the standards of life in Turkey will further improve.”
That the Turkish flag was together with that of the EU in one frame
in the room where Babacan met the press did not pass unnoticed. The
background behind him was split into two; on the one side stood
Turkey’s crescent and star and on the other EU’s 12 stars. The
beginning of the negotiations confers Turkey the right to wave both
flags. If the government decides, both flags can stand next to each
other in Turkey’s all foreign missions.
Ali Babacan’s tone so far was not much political, as he is the
minister of state for treasury; it just manifested how competent he
was in this subject. He used to have rather a technocratic profile.
On October 12, he provided technical information about the organization
of the negotiation delegation and the negotiation process; but he
produced assertive statements as well. The sentence, “policies will
henceforth be grounded upon progress rather than fear” should be
underlined. This sentence targets those who, inside and abroad base
their policies on fears. During the entire conversation, Babacan
seemed committed to the negotiation process and its outcomes.
Those who criticized his youth and thought that he could not
simultaneously handle the ministry and the office of chief negotiator
were faced by a self confident Babacan. In fact his youth can turn
into an advantage during the process. His forming friendship with the
EU Commissioner for enlargement Olli Rehn to the extent of spending
his family holiday with him is a consequence of this. We should not
also forget the EU’s positive approach towards young leaders.
Top negotiator Babacan strongly believes that Turkey will successfully
handle negotiations and end up being a full member of the European
Union (EU). However, he needs to talk the bureaucracy and the public
into believing that this will come true sooner or later. There is no
doubt that as a top negotiator, Babacan will spend most of his time
persuading the Turkish public. As the short-term difficulties emerge,
objections will ease gradually. Those with financial disadvantages
will put much pressure on him eventually. And what’s more is the
need to talk to members of the cabinet into believing in Turkey’s EU
membership. Matters such as Cyprus, allegations about the so-called
Armenian genocide, and the minorities will give the government a
headache. Babacan will be dealing more with the economic aspect of
the EU program.
A large number of government officials claim nothing will be the same
again after October 3. Turkey is most likely to face huge problems
and debates soon on its one-way path. The government is also perfectly
aware of this. Considering the fact that the EU process is so difficult
to manage, the 25-nation bloc was set high on top of the agenda for
all the departments and institutions. A new department has not yet
been formed, and a new structure not developed to meet requirements
due to emerge during the negotiations. The Turkish Prime Minister
has given the ministers the order to deal with the Union first. A
deputy secretary of each department will assume responsibility for
the negotiations.
The high performance of Babacan and his confidence is evidence that
he can overcome the difficulties. Babacan has the chance to find
much room for maneuver thanks to the support of Erdogan and Turkish
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul. The business world and non-governmental
organizations look on it as sure that the government that Babacan
will manage to follow his successful policies on the EU as he has
been successful in dealing with the global business circles. The
picture that Babacan portrayed of himself at Wednesday’s meeting has
the characteristics to prove this point right.

CONNECTING JAMES JOYCE WITH ARMENIA
Belmont Citizen-Herald, MA
Oct 13 2005
Marc A. Mamigonian of Belmont will speak at the National Association
for Armenian Studies and Research Center in Belmont, on Wednesday,
Oct. 26 at 8 p.m., on the Irish novelist James Joyce’s use of Armenian
words and themes.
The lecture, entitled “All Abunk for Tarararat!: Armenian in James
Joyce’s ‘Finnegan’s Wake,'” will be a substantially expanded version
of talks given at international conferences in Dublin in 2004 and at
UCLA in 2005.
James Joyce wrote his final book, “Finnegan’s Wake,” between 1923
and 1939. Joyce, one of the high priests of literary modernism whose
earlier novels, “A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man” (1916) and
“Ulysses” (1922), were in many ways the ultimate expression of that
movement, in “Finnegan’s Wake” demolished the very notion of a unified
work of art, of literary structure, and of the English language itself.
Joyce’s revolution of the word was in part a reaction to the chaos
of World War I, and finding a place in his de-centered universe
are the Armenians and the Armenian Genocide, to which he refers in
the book. This lecture will explore the ways in which Joyce used the
Armenians, the Armenian language, and the Armenian Genocide to support
the book’s major themes of death and rebirth, the “fall from grace,”
and the cyclical nature of history.
The light cast by the Armenian references into the novel’s
vast obscurity is not merely peripheral. Joyce, ever alert to
historical-mythical parallels, saw the Armenians as similar to the
Irish, both nations of “people living in the same place … or also
living in different places,” dispersed, oppressed, persistent in
their refusal to be destroyed.
Mamigonian is director of programs and publications at NAASR, where
he has worked for nearly eight years. Prior to his time at NAASR,
he spent two years at Boston University writing annotations for
a multi-media edition of Joyce’s “Ulysses.” He is co-author of a
full-length commentary on Joyce’s Stephen Hero, published in 2004
by the James Joyce Quarterly, as well as other articles on Joyce,
the Armenians, and other topics. He holds a master’s degree in
English from Tufts University and has taught a class on “Ulysses”
at the Cambridge Center for Adult Education since 1997.
Admission to the event is free (donations appreciated). The NAASR
Bookstore will open at 7:30 p.m. The lecture will begin promptly at
8 p.m.
For more information about the lecture, call 617-489-1610, e-mail
[email protected], or write to NAASR, 395 Concord Ave., Belmont, MA 02478.

CELEBRATE HARVEST AT ARMENIAN CHURCH
Belmont Citizen-Herald, MA
Oct 13 2005
The Women’s Fellowship of the First Armenian Church, 380 Concord Ave.
in Belmont, is sponsoring a Fall Harvest Festival on Saturday, Oct.
22 from noon to 8 p.m.
Armenian delicacies such as shish kebab, losh kebab and chicken kebab
will be served for lunch and dinner, and choreg, string cheese,
yalanchi and manti will be among the many foods available for
purchase. There will also be a wide variety of Armenian and American
pastries for sale. All are welcome.

THE ARMENIAN SHADOW OVER TURKEY’S DEMOCRATISATION
Gunes Tezcur
Open Democracy, UK
Oct 13 2005
Turkish acceptance of the fate of the Armenians in 1915 would unlock
a society steeped in denial of its own historical experience, says
Gunes Tezcur
“Every society experiences defeat in its own way”, observes Wolfgang
Schivelbusch in his book The Culture of Defeat: On National Mourning,
Trauma and Recovery, “but the varieties of response within vanquished
nations conform to a recognisable set of patterns that recur across
time and national boundaries.”
Turkish responses to the Ottoman defeat in the “great war” of 1914-18
have been idiosyncratic. After all, that ignominious defeat gave
birth to ultimate victory under the nationalist leadership of General
Mustafa Kemal, who succeeded in creating a homeland for the Turks and,
as Kemal Atatűrk, led the country until his death in 1938.
Perhaps as a result, almost ninety years since the greatest debacle
ever to have befallen the Turkish people, a collective amnesia of the
disaster prevails. History textbooks do not even tell young Turkish
citizens that the Ottoman empire was defeated in the war.
Also on the future of Turkey in openDemocracy:
Reinhard Hesse, “Turkish honey under a German moon” (March 2004)
Murat Belge, “Turkey and Europe: why friendship is welcome”
(December 2004)
Fred Halliday, “Turkey and the hypocrisies of Europe” (December 2004)
Fadi Hakura, “Europe and Turkey: the end of the beginning” (October
2005)
If you find this material valuable please consider supporting
openDemocracy by sending us a donation so that we can continue our
work and keep it free for all
For the ultimate surrender of the empire, they blame the failure of
the Germans and the allies; for the loss of the Arab territories,
they perpetuate the myth of an “Arab stab in the back.” This denial of
defeat has been accompanied by a denial of any responsibility for the
fate of the empire’s Armenian subjects. And that tragic fate of the
Armenians still haunts Turkey’s prospects for democratisation today.
Debates on the fate of the Armenians living under the Ottoman empire
have intensified in recent years. Armenian communities in the west have
long been active in publicising the Armenian genocide and in urging
western parliaments and governments to recognise it. On 28 September
2005, the European parliament passed a resolution that calls on Turkey
“to recognise the genocide of the Armenians” and considers this act
as a “prerequisite to accession to the European Union.” Meanwhile,
an Istanbul conference organised by Turkish scholars who challenge
the official Turkish line stirred a major controversy after various
attempts to prevent it from convening it proved futile.
Still, Turkish public opinion remains very sensitive to the claims
that Armenians were deliberately annihilated in a policy of ethnic
cleansing. Not just the Turkish state, but large segments of Turkish
society remain defensive. Dissidents have a hard time swaying public
opinion; they feel compelled to state that they are not “traitors.”
How to make sense of the current state of Turkish public opinion?
What can it tell us about the power of national imaginations vis-a-vis
the past on the future of democracy?
Four elements of denial
The denial of Turkey’s defeat in the first world war translates
into sympathy for the Ottoman rulers who perpetrated the acts of
genocide against the Armenians. Mehmet Talat Pasha, the wartime
grand vizier who ordered the mass deportation of Armenians in 1915,
was assassinated in Berlin by an Armenian survivor, Sogomon Teleyran,
in 1921. His remains were brought to Turkey from Germany in 1943 and
reburied on the “hill of liberty” in Istanbul along with those of
the formidable war minister, Enver Pasha.
Talat, Enver, and their accomplices brought about the demise of six
centuries of empire in pursuit of hollow, grandiose designs; they were
men who sent millions to their deaths with impunity. Yet they still
enjoy the status of heroes in contemporary Turkey. Despite the fact
that the Young Turks lost the war, their crimes are long forgotten
if not forgiven by Turkish nationalists.
There are four reasons why Turkish public opinion cannot swallow the
term “genocide”.
First, Turks do not believe that the “Turkish nation” is capable of
committing such unspeakable atrocities.
Second, the extermination of the Armenians has been shrouded in
the claims of a civil war: “if we killed some of them, they also
killed many of us” is the usual reaction of ordinary Turks. It is
not uncommon for the Turkish media to show newly discovered mass
graves full of Turks killed by Armenian militias in eastern Turkey,
or to publish memoirs of old Turks who witnessed Armenian atrocities.
Turkish public opinion is stirred up by the perception that Armenians
exclusively monopolise the status of victim.
Third, it is an open secret that without the annihilation of Armenians,
Turkey’s eastern borders would look quite different.
Fourth, the extreme politicisation of the issue in the international
arena and western pressure on the Turkish government to recognise
the Armenian genocide have strongly contribute to widespread Turkish
feelings of unfairness, exploitation, and inferiority vis-a-vis the
west. In this connection, the passivity of western governments during
the genocides in Bosnia and Rwanda, to cite the most recent cases,
hardly helps their claims to serve as arbiters of justice.
For all these reasons, discussions of the fate of the Armenians
in contemporary Turkey are largely deprived of moral concerns and
sensitivities.
Also in openDemocracy, Nouritza Matossian’s essay on the Armenian
painter Arshile Gorky, “Disinterring the past” (July 2001):
“The violation of history continues to unhinge the present.”
New past, new future
An unfettered and open discussion of the fate of the Armenians would
lead to greater public awareness of the perils of absolute state
power, as it would buttress democratic and accommodative approaches
to dealing with Kurdish nationalism.
It would be naïve, however, to expect that the emergence of the
Armenian issue as a major factor in negotiations between the European
Union and Turkey would tame the chauvinistic tendencies in Turkish
nationalism. It would more likely play into the hands of isolationists
and ultra-nationalists who insist that Europe is insincere and seeks to
“betray” Turkey over and over again.
How the defeats of the past are articulated in national memory
inevitably affects how nations behave in the conflicts of the
present. Crimes committed in times of national desperation or
decadence can occasion healing only when all of their justifications
are categorically rejected by present generations. Then, the culture
of impunity unravels.
In the case of Turkey, this entails a self-critical and unflinching
examination of its greatest defeat, the first world war, as well
as its subsequent victory in the war of independence of 1919-22. A
more open and ethical understanding of the fate of the Armenians is
absolutely essential for Turkey’s democratic future.
–Boundary_(ID_uHJNcEyEE8TlGxR9bQ6W4g)–

BUSINESSMEN ARRESTED AMID COURT BATTLE WITH ARMENIAN CUSTOMS
By Ruzanna Stepanian
Armenialiberty.org, Armenia
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 13 2005
The two top executives of a coffee importing company who have alleged
high-level corruption within Armenian customs have been arrested on
charges of fraud and smuggling, their lawyer said on Thursday.
The arrest of Gagik Hakobian and his deputy Aram Ghazarian is the
latest twist in a long-running bitter dispute between their Royal
Armenia firm and the State Customs Committee (SCC). It began nearly
two years ago when they the company claimed to be penalized for its
refusal to cut illegal deals with corrupt customs officials.
Criminal proceedings against the Royal Armenia executives were launched
by the National Security Service (NSS), the Armenian successor to
the KGB secret police, last spring. The case is reportedly based on
a complaint filed by a U.S. citizen of Armenian descent who claims
that Royal Armenia owes him $164,000 for coffee supplies and has
failed to pay up. The man, identified as Vache Petrosian, has also
alleged that Hakobian and his associates forged financial statements
to understate the volume of their imports.
Hakobian’s lawyer, Ashot Sargsian, described the case as “weird.” “I
wonder why he went to the National Security Service,” Sargsian
told RFE/RL. “If one of the parties fails to honor its contractual
obligations, it must be taken to court.”
“I don’t know what National Security wants today. They themselves
probably don’t know,” he said.
The NSS refused to comment on the case on the grounds that the
investigation is still going on.
Speaking at a news conference last June, Hakobian charged that he is
being prosecuted in retaliation for its high-profile battle with the
customs chiefs. “We are dealing with a group of officials who set
unofficial rules, and if you don’t comply with those rules then you
must not operate,” he said.
The two-year dispute centers on the Customs Committee’s controversial
discretionary power to determine the market value of imported
commodities before levying a fixed 10 percent duty from them. Royal
Armenia, which imports, processes and sells coffee, said last year that
customs officials offered to grossly undervalue price of its imported
coffee beans in return for sharing in the resulting extra profits.
The Armenian customs has evaluated one kilogram of Indonesian raw
coffee imported by Royal Armenia at $1.8. The company insists that
its real purchasing price was only $1.24 per kilogram. The value of
the same sort of coffee brought in by other importers is set at $1.1
per kilogram or even less.
Customs officials say they trust invoices submitted by Royal Armenia’s
competitors but they have yet to clearly explain why they distrust
customs declarations issued by Hakobian’s company.
Royal Armenia says it has repeatedly demanded a written explanation
of the price evaluation policy from the customs but to no avail. It
asked Armenia’s Economic Court last month to force the SCC to provide
such a document and reconsider its controversial import duties. The
court is still considering the lawsuit
Customs administration is one of the most frequent sources of
complaints made by Armenian entrepreneurs. However, few of them go
public with their grievances for fear of government retribution.
Royal Armenia is the only private firm which is known to have publicly
clashed with the SCC in recent years.
Corruption among Armenian officials in charge of collecting taxes and
import duties is widespread. President Robert Kocharian personally
warned senior customs officials on two occasions this year to stop
harassing honest taxpayers and helping importers avoid taxes in return
for kickbacks.
Armenia’s controversial customs chief, Armen Avetisian, is believed to
be close to Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian. Incidentally, Avetisian
has held senior posts in the NSS in the past.

INSURER TO PAY $17 MILLION FOR ARMENIAN GENOCIDE CLASS-ACTION SUIT
By VOA News
Voice of America
Oct 13 2005
Photo: Armenians lay flowers at memorial to Armenians killed under
Ottoman empire
The French insurance company, AXA, has agreed to pay descendants of
some of the more than 1.5 million Armenians killed in Turkey under
the Ottoman empire.
Under terms of a settlement reached in a U.S. court, $17 million will
be shared by Armenian heirs of AXA’s policyholders who died in what
Armenians say was genocide.
This is the second lawsuit pertaining to the killings to be settled
in U.S. courts. In February, New York Life agreed to pay $20 million
to descendants of its Armenian policyholders who were victims of the
alleged genocide.
One of the plaintiffs’ U.S. attorneys, Mark Geragos, said the cases
are historic because they are the first to be heard for genocide
survivors. Mr. Geragos, who is of Armenian descent, said the ultimate
goal of the lawsuits is for the United States and Turkey to officially
acknowledge the genocide.

INSURANCE FIRM TO PAY OUT ON OTTOMAN ARMENIAN POLICIES
NTV MSNBC, Turkey
Oct 13 2005
The French insurance company Axa on Thursday agreed to pay $17
million to settle a case brought by the descendants of Armenian policy
holders the claimants say were killed during the First World War by
the Ottoman Empire.
Guncelleme: 10:31 ET 13 Ekim 2005 PerºembeLOS ANGELES – Turkey has
strenuously rejected suggestions that the Ottoman Empire carried out
a policy of genocide against its Armenian citizens.
Under the settlement, Axa is to pay at least $3.0 million to a
number of Armenian charitable groups based in France, with another
$11 million set aside for the descendants of the original policy
holders of insurance policies with companies that were subsidiaries
of Axa operating in the Ottoman Empire in 1915. Many of the claims
were never met.
Some Armenians claim that up to 1.5 Armenian Ottoman citizens were
killed in 1915 and in the years following in what they describe as
a deliberate act of genocide.
Turkey denies that there was any policy of mass killings, though
does acknowledge that some 300,000 Armenians and many Ottoman Turkish
citizens died during the conflict of the First World War.
–Boundary_(ID_xrnvX+M9pfKE0MQigA3x8g)–

EUROPEAN BOWL HIT BY WITHDRAWAL OF ARMENIA: PLAYERS DENIED VISA
International Korfball Federation, Belgium
Oct 13 2005
The IKF has been informed by the Korfball Federation of Armenia that
six members of their delegation hoping to travel to participate in
the European Bowl have been refused a Visa.
The team had been planning to travel to the Netherlands and then
make onward travel from there to Catalonia. Such an occurrence as
the refusal of a Visa has never before happened in any IKF Tournament
anywhere in the world. We bitterly regret the situation and the IKF
has been forced to reluctantly accept the Armenian’s withdrawal from
the Tournament which is being used as the route to qualification
for the European Championships, scheduled for Budapest next April,
and the World Championships due to take place in 2007.
Matches schedule:
Day 1 Portugal vs. Poland (1845 hrs) Opening Ceremony (2000 hrs)
Catalonia (Spain) vs. Russia (2045 hrs)
Day 2 Russia vs. Portugal (1900 hrs) Poland vs. Catalonia (Spain)
(2045 hrs)
Day 3 Russia vs. Poland (1900 hrs) Catalonia (Spain) vs. Portugal
(2045 hrs)
Day 4 3rd vs. 4th (1100 hrs) 1st vs. 2nd (1245 hrs)
The first three days will have the pool matches and on the final day
matches based on the end of pool positions to decide the medal winners.
The European Bowl is a new IKF event being used as a qualification
event for the European Senior Championships 2006 to be held in Hungary
and the World Championships 2007 to be held in Czech Republic. The
inaugural edition will take place in Terrassa (Spain) from October
27-30, 2005.

JUMP ON HISTORY BANDWAGON WHILE YOU CAN
By Jeff Schmucker
Atchison Daily Globe, KS
Oct 13 2005
I believe it was Max Lerner who once said, “The so-called lessons of
history are for the most part the rationalizations of the victors.
History is written by the survivors.”
Other arguably more famous people in history have used or paraphrased
this quote, by saying: “History is written by the victors” but the
meaning seems to hold true.
After all, you won’t read many books glorifying the Nazi regime from
World War II because, as many readers probably (and should) know,
they “lost” the war.
But history isn’t just about winners and losers; it tells the story
of where we’ve been and how far we’ve come as a civilization. If we
study it closely, it will also warn us of mistakes best not repeated.
So the question is, if history is so important, why don’t public
schools emphasize teaching it at the same level as English and
mathematics?
With so many tests and standards, teachers seem forced to teach the
curriculum based on ensuring students can pass multiple tests, but
not necessarily whether they are truly learning about the subject.
History isn’t something you can really cram. It’s very encompassing,
and there are many elements surrounding a time period that are needed
to be known to truly understand.
With so many government requirements for teachers, different ethnic
groups are jumping on the history bandwagon by petitioning lawmakers
to ensure the history of their group’s struggles are included in
school history lessons.
According to a story on CNN’s web site called,
“Schools directed to expand history curriculums”
(),
along with studies on the Holocaust, Civil War and slavery, the
Great Depression, segregation and other American history subjects,
groups are also pushing for students in different states to learn
about Cesar Chavez, a farm labor activist, the Irish potato famine,
Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, the Armenian genocide of the early
1900s and other historic events and issues.
When you pile these on top of world history and geography, it’s simple
to see that teachers and students have a full plate before test time.
Then is it any wonder people are ignorant of basic geography and
history?
If you watch Jay Leno’s “Jay Walking,” you’ll see some sad examples
of how easily people forget information they supposedly learned in
grade school.
“Name two states that do not border the United States,” Mr. Leno
asks someone.
“Uh…is it Canada and Mexico,” answers the participant.
Somewhere in the United States, there is a history/geography teacher
clenching his or her fists and asking, “Why do I bother?”
While I know Alaska and Hawaii are the two states not connected to
the other 48 states, there are many historical and geographical facts
that I know I should know, but I’m as ignorant as the thousands or
millions of other people.
And how can we reduce this problem when history happens every day?
I’m sure it was much easier for teachers to teach history before World
War II and onward when more than 50 years of history wasn’t included
in their lesson plans.
There we go again, adding more work for teachers as they were forced to
add World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the civil rights era
and Desert Storm to their list along with other historical information.
So what does or does not get taught?
When Pearl Harbor was attacked on Dec. 7, 1941, by Japanese aircraft,
I bet many people thought, “No one will ever forget this gruesome
day in history.”
Talk to someone in their 20s or even 30s and ask them when Pearl
Harbor was attacked. You may be shocked to discover how many don’t
know. You may be even more shocked to discover how many think Germany
or China was responsible.
Give it a couple of decades and I’m sure people will vaguely remember
9/11. It’ll just be one of those events that happened a long time ago.
So for you parents, teachers and lawmakers who feel certain time
periods should be taught in school, you’d better jump on the history
bandwagon while you can. History is happening and it won’t be too
long before other important events are forgotten.
———-
Jeff Schmucker, a Globe reporter, can be reached at 367-0583, Ext.
214, or [email protected].

Armenian National Committee of America
888 17th St., NW Suite 904
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 775-1918
Fax: (202) 775-5648
E-mail: [email protected]
Internet:
PRESS RELEASE
October 13, 2005
Contact: Elizabeth S. Chouldjian
Tel: (202) 775-1918
INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION CONTINUES TO MOUNT AGAINST
CAUCASUS RAILROAD PROPOSAL THAT BYPASSES ARMENIA
— European Commission Rules Out Support for Turkish
Railroad Proposal that would Institutionalize
Turkey’s Closed Border with Armenia
WASHINGTON, DC – The European Commission has added its voice to the
growing international opposition to a Caucasus railroad proposal by
the Turkish government that would, if built, institutionalize
Turkey’s border closure with Armenia, reported the Armenian
National Committee of America (ANCA).
The Commission’s position was articulated this week by the
Directorate General for Transport and Energy. In explaining why
the European Union would not support the creation of this rail
line, the Directorate noted that its construction was both
unnecessary and inefficient in light of the existing railroad
connecting Kars, Gyumri, and Tbilisi. This line, which passes
through Armenia, was effectively shut down more than a decade ago
by Turkey’s imposition of its blockade of Armenia, which continues
to this day.
The Commission’s adoption of this position comes in response to a
May 21st letter from Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian to
Jacques Barrot, Deputy Chairman of the European Commission. In
this letter, the Foreign Minister outlined the destabilizing
implications of the proposed route bypassing Armenia, and stressed
the willingness of the government of Armenia to cooperate in the
reactivation of the existing Kars-Gyumri-Tbilisi railway, which
remains fully functional but unused due to the unilateral Turkish
blockade.
“We welcome the wise position taken by the European Commission
against Turkey’s most recent effort to effectively institutionalize
its border closure with Armenia. The well founded concerns raised
by the Commission reflect and reinforce those being addressed in
the U.S. Congress by the South Caucasus Integration and Open
Railroads Act,” said ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. “In
pressing forward so recklessly with this politically motivated
proposal, Turkey openly disregards the Administration’s repeated
calls to end its decade-long border closure with Armenia. Clearly,
this disregard must be recognized and reckoned with by the U.S.
Congress, which should, in the coming weeks, act in an urgent and
decisive manner to check Turkey’s growing indifference to U.S.
priorities in the region.”
On July 21st, Armenian Caucus Co-Chairs Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) and
Frank Pallone (D-NJ), along with Rep. George Radanovich (R-CA),
introduced legislation addressing this issue by barring U.S.
financing for such rail projects circumventing Armenia. The ANCA
welcomed this bipartisan effort, noting that it would protect U.S.
taxpayers from subsidizing a totally unnecessary and regionally
destabilizing proposal by Turkey aimed at isolating Armenia. The
measure, known as the “South Caucasus Integration and Open
Railroads Act of 2005” (H.R.3361), currently has 39 House
cosponsors and is gaining support from both sides of the aisle.
The text of the legislation notes “the exclusion of Armenia from
regional economic and commercial undertakings in the South Caucasus
undermines the United States policy goal of promoting a stable and
cooperative environment in the region.” In its operative section,
the legislation prohibits U.S. assistance “to develop or promote
any rail connections or railway-related connections that do not
traverse or connect with Armenia, but do traverse or connect Baku,
Azerbaijan; Tbilisi, Georgia; and Kars, Turkey.” Specific forms of
U.S. assistance prohibited would include: foreign economic and
development aid, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, Trade and
Development Agency, and the Export-Import Bank.
The ANCA raised this issue publicly as early as June 10th of this
year in a question to Foreign Minister Oskanian, during a briefing
at the National Press Club. Minister Oskanian expressed concern
that this would be a wasteful undertaking for the international
community. He said that they [Turkey] are “planning on spending
something from $600 million to $1 billion to put that railroad in
place.”
The Minister closed his comments, by stressing that, “This is in no
one’s interest – not the U.S. or European Union or the countries
involved. I have raised this issue with the Administration and
they understand, they promised to follow this, and to try to talk
them [the Turkish government] out of engaging in this type of
senseless, useless activity.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress