US “TIRED OF KOSOVO”
B92, Yugoslavia
Oct 5 2005
BELGRADE, WASHINGTON — Wednesday – The US administration is tired
of dealing with the situation in Kosovo and wants to hand it over
completely to the European Union, US Balkans analyst Nicholas Gvozdev
has said.
Gvozdev told The Voice of America that stumbling block is that the EU,
with its 25 member countries, has problems in making decisions and
already has its hands full with issues such as the further enlargement
of the union.
Even though Kosovo status discussions may begin shortly, Gvozdev said
that they could last years, comparing the situation to the apparently
never-ending Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
“The possibility that the discussions will begin soon does not mean
that momentum for a rapid solution exists. The insistence of some
people in Washington on the independence of Kosovo minimizes the
possibility for upholding the territorial integrity of countries such
as Iraq and Georgia, while calling for decentralization could weaken
the Dayton Agreement for keeping Bosnia-Herzegovina unified.” Gvozdev
said.
Gvozdev compares the situation in Kosovo to Nagorn-Karabagh, over
which Armenia and Azerbaijan have been in status talks for fifteen
years. The situation in this region has come to a stand-still, despite
various talks of independence, decentralization and united countries.
Asked who he thinks will be responsible for having the last say in
Kosovo, Gvozdev said that the EU is more likely than the US to be
the key player in the eventual solution.
“The US is looking to detach itself from participating in finding
peaceful solutions for various global situations. In addition, Kosovo
and the Balkans are a part of Europe, and the European Union should
take care of these problems, because it has more shared interests;
trade, migration, borders, visas, etc.” Gvozdev said.
;nav_category=&nav_id=33031&order=priority&style=headlines

CHAIRMAN OF CEC: “IF THERE IS A VIOLATION IN REGISTRATION OF CANDIDATES WITH PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS, SUCH CANDIDATES WILL BE DISQUALIFIED”
Today, Azerbaijan
Oct 5 2005
Interview with the chairman of the Central Elections Commission (CEC),
Mazahir Panahov.
Question: Is the process on clarification of electors’ list held by
the CEC complete. Was the electors’ list on Khankandi constituency
compiled?
Answer: List of electors, who are Azerbaijani by origin, in the
Khankandi constituency has been compiled. However, the list of
citizens, Armenian by origin, is still to be compiled. Even unless the
list of clarified, the results of elections on Khankandi constituency
will be considered as adopted, because there no quorum on number of
electors in the Azerbaijani legislation. So, the participation of
electors, Azerbaijanis by origin, in the elections will be enough
to consider the results of voting as legal. The international
organizations also gave positive estimation to the establishment of
the Khankandi constituency. An interim report by the OSCE Office
for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Election Observation
Mission (EOM) to the Republic of Azerbaijan Parliamentary Elections
in particular stressed the issue.
Question: The document also contains some notes in connection with
the pre-election processes in Azerbaijan. How do you estimate the
interim report by the OSCE/ODIHR and EOM?
Answer: The report is normal and balanced, while there are some
milestones which I can’t agree with. I think they take wrong position
in connection with participation of religious leaders. The precinct
elections commissions did not register the candidacy of the head of
religious Jewish community, Mr. Zelmanovich, as the Constitution of
Azerbaijan bans the election of religious leaders to the parliament.
The OSCE tries to make suspicious that Zelmanovich is a religious
leader. However, he himself indicted his official position in the
document submitted to the precinct elections commission as the
head of the Jewish religious community. The head of the religious
community is a clerical leader, so the precinct elections commission
did not register his candidacy and the CEC maintained the resolution
in force. OSCE makes notes in this respect, while I’m sure there is
no ground for dissatisfaction. Besides, there are notes in connection
with the cancellation of the candidacy of the chairman of the Islamic
Party, Hajiaga Nuri. There is no any restriction in the registration
of the political parties in Azerbaijan in respect to their religious
activities. To my mind, such notes included in the report do not
correspond to reality as well. The rest can be somehow accepted. As
of general estimation, the pre-elections developments go on well. The
international organizations, in particular, their observation missions
do not consider as necessary to mark the satisfactory peculiarities of
the situation. They mainly note and inform about the shortcomings. As
it seems, no serious shortcomings were indicated in the report.
Question: How many international observers will observe the elections?
Answer: Over 100 international observers have been registered thus
far. Their total number attains even 1000 people. Vladimir Rushaylo,
the chairman of the CIS Executive Committee, will pay a visit to Baku
on 5 October with his delegation. The mission of observers plans
to hold meetings with the leadership of the CEC and discuss the
pre-elections processes. I guest the CIS mission will be satisfied
with the current stage of elections and work done by the CEC thus far
for holding elections. Question: How do you estimate the process of
electioneering? Answer: I think this stage develops quite normally.
We should not lose from sight the number of candidates to participate
in the elections is quite high. Over 2,000 candidates ballot for
deputy mandate. So, it would not be real to name everything as
ideal and urge that all candidates will behave correctly. In some
cases they lay accusation on each other. As a chairman of the CEC,
I would like not to see such facts. Some candidates even come out
against the statehood, which is also unacceptable.
Question: Some complaints are made on the heads of the Executive
Powers, state officers, involved in the elections process. Some
candidates, abusing their better financial status, try to attract
the voters. Does the CEC take relevant steps in regard to such people?
Answer: We studied some complaints and revealed that they did not
correspond to reality. Some problems sometimes are exaggerated. In
case the complaints do not correspond to reality, people who commit
law-breaks are warned. The CEC takes steps in accordance with the
law. The candidacy of those who made serious violations can be
disqualified in the end.
Question: When will the results of the investigation into cases of
candidate with previous accusations be publicized?
Answer: the CE secretaries are seriously involved in it. As a result
we will define how legal the registration of the candidates is. In
general, 10 candidates are suspected to have such accusations.
Shortly, the court will provide the reply and the CEC will take a
final resolution. If any law-break is revealed, the candidate will
be immediately disqualified. The results will be publicized late
this week.
Question: The opposition parties and blocs are anew going to appeal
to the CEC with request to combine the free air time allocated them.
Could the proposal be implemented?
Answer: No, the proposal fully contradicts the legislation. Even if
the CEC wants, it cannot do it. So, the CEC did not consider the
appeal. The CEC secretaries explained it with irrelevance of such
proposals with their competency. The CEC Secretary, Vidadi Mahmudov,
held talks with the applicants. As to their dissatisfaction with
the duration of air time, it concerns only the free air time. The
candidates can use the paid air time as much as they want. AzTV and
the Public TV offer better conditions for candidates. I guess, there
is no ground for dissatisfaction.
Question: Were the shortages in covering the elections removed after
the CEC’s appeal to media?
Answer: Yes, the TV channels have fully observed the law and the
process of covering of the elections develops normally. The mistakes
made earlier are also eliminated.

AZERI, ARMENIAN REPRESENTATIVES TO MEET IN STRASBOURG
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Oct 5 2005
Baku, October 4, AssA-Irada
Representatives of Azerbaijan and Armenia are due to meet in Strasbourg
on Wednesday to discuss ways of settling the long-standing Upper
Garabagh conflict.
The meeting of the two delegations will be attended by the chairman
of the PACE subcommittee on Upper Garabagh, former PACE president
Lord Russel Johnston.
Azerbaijan will be represented at the discussions by the head of
the Azerbaijani delegation at PACE Samad Seyidov and its member
Asim Mollazada.*

U.S. DOES NOT RECOGNIZE GARABAGH’S INDEPENDENCE
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Oct 5 2005
Baku, October 4, AssA-Irada
Several pro-Armenian representatives, including the US congressional
taskforce on Armenian affairs, have sent a letter to President Bush
calling for recognition of the self-proclaimed Upper Garabagh Republic.
Commenting on the matter, the US Department of State spokesman Sean
McCormack said the United States does not recognize Upper Garabagh
as an independent state.
“Washington’s policy on Upper Garabagh remains unchanged. We support
the work done by the OSCE Minsk Group and its efforts in settling
the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict”, McCormack told a news briefing.
McCormack added that the international community does not recognize
the authorities of Upper Garabagh.*

DEFENCE MINISTER ON VISIT TO ARMENIA
Athens News Agency
Oct 4 2005
Greece’s national defence minister Spilios Spiliotopoulos on Tuesday
commenced a two-day visit to Armenia, at the invitation of his Armenian
counterpart Serzh Sargsyan.
During his visit, the Greek minister will hold talks with Sargsyan,
and will also meet with Armenian president Robert Kocharyan, prime
minister Andranik Margaryan, and Patriarch Garegin of Armenia.
The agenda of the talks include bilateral military and technical
defence cooperation and reorganisation of the Armenian Armed Forces,
matters relating to NATO and the European Union, as well as the
security situation in SE Europe and the wider region of the northern
Caucasus.
Earlier, Spiliotopoulos attended an inner cabinet meeting in Athens
that ratified four draft bills for deregulating the energy market.

ARAM I TO BLESS CHURCH BUILDING IN LA CRESCENTA
By Alex Dobuzinskis, Staff Writer
Los Angeles Daily News, CA
Oct 5 2005
LA CRESCENTA – Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian looks forward to the
day next spring when the La Crescenta church headquarters for the
Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America opens to
welcome the community.
But another momentous day for the archbishop and his prelacy will come
Saturday, when His Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of the Great House
of Cilicia, will bless the under-construction facility as part of a
Southern California visit.
The church leader, who is based in Lebanon, arrives today in
Los Angeles. Over the next two weeks, he will speak to students,
churchgoers, officials, religious leaders and participants in a
University of Southern California symposium.
“The invitation is open to our faithful, and this is the message: Come
and be inspired by our pontiff, who will invite us to the knowledge
of light,” Mardirossian said.
On Saturday, Aram I will bless and consecrate a cross that will be
hoisted to the top of a prayer room at the future prelacy headquarters,
6252 Honolulu Ave., La Crescenta.
Converted from an office building, the building will have 12,000
square feet of space, including an assembly room, offices, a library
and the prayer room. A fountain will memorialize victims of the
Armenian genocide of 1915-23. Stone was imported from Armenia to
cover the walls.
Hollywood was an early destination for Armenian immigrants arriving
in Southern California, and the prelacy made its headquarters there.
But the Armenian community has moved in large part to the Glendale
area.
“Wherever our community moves, the church and the clergy should move
with the community, because the shepherd should be with the flock,”
Mardirossian said.
The prelacy oversees eight private schools in California, nine church
buildings and several congregations without their own church.
The Armenian church is divided into two administrations, both of
which share a common theology but are based in different places.
Aram I is based in Antelias, Lebanon. In June, His Holiness Karekin
II, who is based in Armenia, visited Southern California and blessed a
cathedral under construction in Burbank, headquarters of the Western
Diocese of the Armenian Church of North America, a separate entity
from the prelacy.
The Catholicosate of Cilicia was created after a 10th century
displacement of Armenians to Cilicia, in what is now Turkey. It moved
to Lebanon because of the 20th century genocide.
Armenians living outside Armenia in such countries as Iran and Syria
continue to be oriented to the Catholicosate of Cilicia.
“Both men are beloved figures,” said Raffi Hamparian, board member of
the Armenian National Committee of America. “Aram Catholicos carries
with him the title of moderator of the World Council of Churches,
which is an added mention of his role not only in the Armenian nation
but to the Christian faith worldwide.”
[email protected]
IF YOU GO: On Oct. 15, His Holiness Aram I will participate in a
symposium at the University of Southern California on the theme of
the Christian response to violence, with an emphasis on the Armenian
genocide. The symposium runs from 10 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. at USC’s
Davidson Conference Center, in the Embassy Room. Those interested
in going to the symposium should register through the prelacy at
(818) 248-7737.

THE PERSPECTIVES OF COOPERATION HIGHLIGHTED
National Assembly of RA, Armenia
Oct 5 2005
On October 4 Artur Baghdasaryan, RA NA Speaker received Simon Lunn,
NATO PA General Secretary, who is in Armenia within the framework of
holding the NATO PA and RA NA joint seminar “The Security in South
Caucasus.” Mher Shageldyan, Chairman of RA NA Standing Committee
on Defense, Internal Affairs and National Security participated at
the meeting.
During the meeting both sides highlighted the issues of RA NA
Cooperation and NATO PA. Mr. Lunn noted that the South Caucasus region
is one of the priorities of NATO PA and highlighted the active work
in the Inter-parliamentary Assembly, appraising the activity of the
Armenian delegation. During the meeting the possibilities of holding
international conferences against anti-terrorism and use of chemical
weapon in Armenia in 2006 were also discussed. Mr. Lunn expressed
the full assistance of NATO PA to those programmes.
RA NA Speaker Artur Baghdasaryan highlighted the assistance of NATO
PA in the regional cooperation, noting that the joint discussions
promote the overcoming of disagreements.
During the meeting other issues were also discussed.

TWO SESSIONS OF CIS INTERPARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY COMMISSIONS TO BE HELD IN YEREVAN
PRAVDA< Russia Oct 5 2005 Two sessions of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly commissions (Economy and Finance; Science and Education) would be held in Yerevan, Armenia, on October 7. Speaker of the National Assembly of Armenia Artur Bagdasaryan made the statement at a briefing. It should be noted, that Artur Bagdasaryan and the Secretary General of the CIS IPA Mikhail Krotov would address the joint session. Members of the commissions will also meet Armenia's Minister of Education and Science Sergo Yeritsyan and Minister of Finance and Economy Vardan Khachatryan, REGNUM reported.

E.U. BID KEEPS TURKEY ON PATH OF REFORM
By Karl Vick
Washington Post
Oct 5 2005
Goal Is Distant, But Pressure Isn’t
ISTANBUL, Oct. 4 — Turks say they know the negotiations that formally
opened in Luxembourg a few moments after midnight Tuesday morning
may not end with Turkey actually joining the European Union.
“The biggest problem, to start with, is that we’re Muslims,” said
Rabia Yasar, 18, to the nods of fellow students on an Istanbul street.
But even as they downgrade their expectations, Turks still very
much want to join Europe, polls show. And keeping that possibility
alive nourishes a new climate of change that already has brought a
flurry of reforms to a country that had long been almost impervious
to foreign pressure.
“It’s historic,” said Cuneyt Ulsever, a columnist for Hurriyet, a
mainstream daily newspaper. “We all grew up with our father holding a
stick in his hand to make us do our homework. Without any imposition
from outside, Turkey would quickly lose contact with reform.”
Even with the start of membership negotiations early Tuesday, the
process of Turkey joining Europe is expected to take at least 10
years. In the past three years, Turkish lawmakers have voted to ban
torture, outlaw the death penalty, dissolve special security courts,
revise the criminal code and dilute the power of a military that
three times since 1960 has taken power from civilian governments.
All the changes came at the behest of the European Union, which
requires member states to conform to so-called European norms.
“E.U. membership is the means of realizing Turkey’s claim of being
a democratic, liberal, just and prosperous society,” Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday told his ruling Justice and Development
Party, which calls itself reformist.
In the past month, as the start date for talks loomed, critics
scheduled news conferences to show what work still needed to be done,
and Turkish officials scrambled to demonstrate that their country
really could change.
With the public encouragement of Erdogan, scholars gathered in Istanbul
for the first independent public examination here of the deaths of
1 million Armenians in eastern Turkey during the last days of the
Ottoman Empire. Police lines kept back ultranationalists who gathered
to protest that shattering of what was termed “Turkey’s last taboo.”
Less noticed was the launch of a government program that pays
households for sending their daughters to school. The move was aimed
at undoing traditions that impede women’s rights in the Anatolian
heartland.
“If there were only the European side of Turkey, it would be easy,”
said Ifgenia Minaoglu, in the Katia shop that for half a century has
made custom hats for the elite of Istanbul society, who have long
considered themselves continental.
Others worry that Europe will bring not only rights and prosperity
but also homogenization. “We’ve been living without the E.U. up to
now,” said Nadira Canan, her hair tucked under the head scarf that
many Turkish women believe Islam requires them to wear in public. “If
we’re going to lose the values of our culture, then we’re better off
not part of it.”
But the headlines of Monday’s front pages, just under news of
the E.U. cliffhanger in which Austria nearly blocked the start of
membership talks, told of changes already underway: life in prison for
a man who killed his 16-year-old daughter because she had been raped,
an “honor crime” that a year ago would have brought a lighter sentence;
the opening by a state official of a home in central Istanbul for
battered and homeless women.
“The speed of reform has increased tremendously,” said Meltem Muftuler
Bac, who studies Turkey and the E.U. at Istanbul’s Sabanci University.
On an inside page, Hurriyet on Tuesday discreetly displayed the front
page it had prepared in the event that Austria had prevailed in its
attempt to deny Turkey full E.U. membership. The mock-up featured
a giant photo of Adolf Hitler throwing a straight-arm salute. “The
Same Spirit,” the headline read.
At the same time, Turkish nationalists have also been energized
by the E.U. bid, turning out tens of thousands of protesters for a
weekend rally where Erdogan’s government was accused of selling out
the country’s sovereignty. Turks are raised to be deeply invested in
their state, and some analysts predict that mind-set is more likely
to derail union with Europe than the country’s size, poverty, Middle
Eastern borders or even religion.
“Whatever the state thinks, that’s what I think,” said Arsez
Degirmencioglu, 70, outside his clock shop in downtown Istanbul. “I
don’t have any individual thoughts.”

EUROPEAN ELITES CAN’T IGNORE THE VIEWS OF THEIR PEOPLES
Jonathan Freedland
The Guardian, UK
Oct 5 2005
Opening the door to Turkey was right, but EU expansion is bound to
fail if the dreamers ignore the majority
One of the least noticed political deaths of recent times was the
demise of Britain in Europe. Launched with great hoopla in 1999, at
a glossy event attended by Tony Blair, Charles Kennedy and the Tory
titans Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine – a gesture for which Clarke
may yet pay a high price – the organisation was quietly put to sleep
in August. Cause of death: the no votes in France and the Netherlands,
which sealed the fate of the European constitution.
“Campaign operations have ceased because there is no campaign,”
says a spokesman, still manning the phones in what used to be HQ.
Britain in Europe’s founding purpose was UK entry into the euro. At
the time, our national politics seemed to revolve around the issue.
The Conservative party drove itself crazy over it, as rival factions
subjected every utterance to almost theological scrutiny. Differences
over the euro were held to be the defining gulf that separated Blair
from Gordon Brown. The most eminent political commentators in the
land swore that an eventual referendum on the single currency would
be the most significant decision today’s generation of Britons would
ever face.
That all seems a long time ago now. At last week’s Labour party
conference, neither Blair nor Brown so much as mentioned it. On Monday
in Blackpool, Clarke referred to the euro – but only to say it was
“paranoid” to imagine he would ever try to lead Britain into it.
It is the deadest of dead letters.
The constitution briefly served as a surrogate goal for British
euro enthusiasts, but the French and Dutch killed that off too. To
complete the process, economic lethargy on the continent has erased
the europhiles’ longest-serving argument – that basket-case Britain
needs to learn from its successful neighbours – so that now Blair
lectures the other Europeans on what they might learn from us. When
the prime minister did address the theme last week, it was only to
diss the EU’s big beasts. “Not for us the malaise of France or the
angst of Germany,” he said, with acid in his voice.
On Monday, there came a moment when this downward trend seemed poised
to reach its logical conclusion. If Austria’s objections had been
heeded, and the union’s 25 member states had blocked talks aimed at
Turkish entry, the sense of gloom would have been all-consuming. With
Germany paralysed and government-less and France gazing at its own
navel, the defeat of the EU’s latest grand design – eastward expansion
beyond Christendom – would have marked 2005 as the year the wheels
finally came off the great Euro-train. That outcome was avoided
and that is surely welcome. Advocates of Turkish entry were right
to argue that the admission into the EU of a large Muslim democracy
would represent the best possible proof that there need be no clash of
civilisations: no longer will the jihadists be able to speak of the
Christian west pitted against the Muslim rest. Instead the EU, that
quintessentially western club, will count as one of its biggest members
– with a projected population of 80 million in 2015, the earliest
possible year of entry – a nation now ruled by an Islamist government.
So opening the door to Turkey was the right move. And it is just an
opening. If Turkey does not improve its appalling record on human
rights, the door should stay closed. Optimists say the country
has already passed eight key packages of constitutional reforms,
abolished the death penalty and changed its stance on Kurdish rights –
recently establishing Kurdish-language TV services. Pessimists say the
mentally-ill continue to be punished rather than treated, that last
week Ankara moved to outlaw the country’s leading gay rights movement
and that dissent is still criminalised: witness the prosecution of the
novelist Orhan Pamuk for daring to challenge Turkey’s state denial of
its 20th-century crimes against the Armenians. As for the Kurds, say
the worriers, let’s see what happens if Iraq breaks up and the north
of the country becomes independent Kurdistan. Then we’ll discover
how relaxed Turkey really is.
The optimists reckon the carrot of EU membership will persuade Turkey
to keep on changing. For Mark Leonard of the Centre for European
Reform this is where the EU’s bureaucratic style comes into its own.
Submit Turkey to a decade of Brussels “nit-picking” and Ankara
will have to clean up its act – not just passing liberal laws but
implementing them. “It won’t be good enough to do it for 10 minutes,”
says Leonard. “It’s got to be for 10 years.”
This is what Europhiles mean when they speak of the “soft power” of
the union, the capacity to draw countries towards democracy through
the magnetic pull of EU-style prosperity and stability. How much
better, and more effective, than the “hard power” of George Bush:
democracy delivered by bombs from the sky and boots on the ground.
Yet Europhiles should not be too smug too soon. Monday’s decision
may have averted a train wreck, but the course ahead is hardly smooth.
For one thing, to admit Turkey is to repeat the very behaviour
that has created the union’s crisis of legitimacy. Once again, the
governments and elites have pressed ahead with a step that their
peoples loudly oppose. Europe-wide polling shows a clear majority
against Turkish membership, with unambiguous opposition in Germany,
France and the Netherlands, rising to 80% in Austria. One can shake
one’s head at the xenophobia or even Islamophobia that might lurk
behind those numbers, but it won’t do any good. If this year’s
referendum defeats said anything, it was that Europeans were fed
up with their views being pushed aside by a political class that,
time after time, insists it knows best. To press ahead blithely with
Turkish admission, waving aside the concerns of these majorities,
would be to have learned nothing.
Instead, those who believe Turkey belongs in the EU will have to
spend the next decade making a case for it. That means explaining
how a country where income per head is a tenth of the UK’s – and
which will instantly become the EU’s poorest member – can fit into
a club dominated by wealthy, industrialised nations. And how the
poorest workers in the union will be able to withstand competition
from migrants ready to work for even lower wages.
There are answers to these questions. The Turkish economy is growing,
so that the gap between it and the rest of the EU should be narrower
by the time entry comes around. And there could be a transition period,
delaying the day when Turkish workers are able to offer their services
anywhere in the union.
Whatever the specifics, answers there will have to be. Because the old
European way of doing business – act first, worry about legitimacy
afterwards – is surely over. The people won’t put up with it any
longer. France and Austria, for example, have reserved the right
to refuse any further EU expansion in a referendum. In other words,
Turkish membership could be vetoed on the whim of Lille and Linz.
The European dreamers still have grand plans – eyeing the Balkans,
Georgia and the Ukraine as potential recruits – as if they have
replaced one driving goal with another. The obsession used to be ever
deeper, federalist integration; now it is ever wider expansion. But
if they pursue the new ambition the way they chased the last one,
with scant regard for the people they claim to represent, it will
meet the same fate: failure.