BEARING RESPONSIBILITY FOR GENOCIDE
by Carlo Romero
Oklahoma Daily, OK
Oct 4 2005
Staff column
“We have talked; we have sympathized; we have expressed our horror;
the time to act is long past due.”
These words appeared in a 1943 resolution by the U.S. Senate Foreign
Relations Committee calling for the liberation of European Jews from
the Nazi Holocaust.
They need to be spoken again about the genocide in Darfur, Sudan,
before the conscience of another generation is stained.
Already, since 2003, an estimated 300,000 African Sudanese have been
summarily slaughtered by their own Arab government in Darfur. At the
same time, more than 2 million people have been driven from their
homes in Darfur and forced to live indefinitely in refugee camps
in other regions of Sudan or neighboring Chad. Refugees have been
left to fight for sparse humanitarian aid while being harassed by
government militias.
The United States has a responsibility to take definitive action to
stop genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan.
According to a report by the United Nations International Commission of
Inquiry on Darfur released in January, “Government forces and militias
conducted indiscriminate attacks, including killing of civilians,
torture, enforced disappearances, destruction of villages, rape and
other forms of sexual violence, pillaging and forced displacement,
throughout Darfur.”
Alarmingly, the U.N. Commission found that “attacks on villages,
killing of civilians, rape, pillaging and forced displacement have
continued” despite its presence in the Sudan.
On Sept. 9, 2004, the United States declared through then Secretary
of State Colin Powell that the atrocities committed by the Sudanese
government amounted to genocide.
In a statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Powell
cited “a consistent and widespread pattern of atrocities committed
against non-Arab villagers” and “that the government of Sudan and
the Janjaweed bear responsibility.”
Powell was right about the scale of human devastation. He was wrong
about who bears responsibility.
In a day and age when a person can fly anywhere in the world in less
than 24 hours, when no First World closet is without textiles from at
least 10 Third-World countries, when the Internet reveals precision
satellite photos of every square mile on the globe at any time of the
day to anyone interested, we all bear responsibility for the genocide
that is taking place in Darfur.
Americans in particular, who still live in a democracy (despite the
complaints of journalists and college professors), bear responsibility
for seeking information about the genocide and provoking their
government leaders to take action.
Tragically, the glaring majority of the civilized world has managed
to ignore the atrocities of Darfur.
Print media have buried stories about Sudan in the depths of their
publications. And, in 2004, NBC and CBS spent a total of eight minutes
covering the genocide in Darfur (Harper’s Index, October 2005). The
fourth estate has failed to fulfill its watchdog role, thus forcing
those interested in Sudan to turn to less accessible sources.
More and more, the situation bears stark resemblance to the genocide
inflicted on Armenians by the Ottoman-Turkish government in the second
decade of the 20th century. Despite a mountain of evidence exposing the
horrors, including photographs of mass graves and execution squads,
the United States held an isolationist stance during the Armenian
genocide and allowed over one million Christian Armenians to fall by
knife, bullet or worse to the Ottoman government. The country that
is now Turkey still denies the genocide ever took place.
The world’s reaction to the genocide in Darfur is also reminiscent
of the reaction to the more recent genocide that took place in Rwanda
in 1994. In Rwanda, more than 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered at the
hands of the Hutu majority while the world watched on the evening news.
The United States never involved itself in Rwandan genocide. And
the United Nations, who maintained peacekeeping troops in the region
to prevent widespread violence prior to the genocide, abandoned the
Tutsis and its purpose when the violence actually escalated.
Last Wednesday, Sept. 28, the U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland
warned about Darfur, “If (violence) continues to escalate, if it
continues to be so dangerous on humanitarian work, we may not be able
to sustain our operation for 2.5 million people requiring lifesaving
assistance.”
We walk into the Holocaust Museum and out of Hotel Rwanda saying
“never again.” Yet, in the words of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,
“It is happening again.”
Americans can only inspire their government to take action in Darfur
by displaying popular sentiment in favor of such action.
We must write our congressmen to voice distress about the genocide
in the Sudan.
We must organize demonstrations to show our leaders that we are
unified in our humanitarian cause.
But first, we must accept responsibility. Then we must act.
-Carlo Romero is a letters senior. His column appears every other
Tuesday, and he can be reached at [email protected].

TURKEY GOT OVER EUROPE
A1+
| 14:44:40 | 04-10-2005 | Politics |
As result of efforts exerted in the course of 40 years the EU-Turkey
negotiations on full membership have opened.
After long and intense discussion EU FMs came to accord in
Luxembourg. Thus, the stalemate situation was overcome: Austria
renounced its proposal on “privileged partnership” to Turkey. On
the night of October 4 the talks on Turkey’s accession to the EU
opened officially.
Before departing for LuxembourgTurkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
words, the agreement fits Turkey’s interests fully. “This is
a really historical day for Europe and the whole international
community,” stated the Premier of the UK, which presides at the EU
at present. There is a long way ahead still, he added.

US POLICY TOWARDS KARABAKH SETTLEMENT HAS NOT CHANGED
Pan Armenian
04.10.2005 10:32
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ US policy towards settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict has not changed, stated US State Department official
representative Sean McCormack. He stated it when answering to a
question whether the letter sent to George Bush by 59 Congressmen on
protection of NK right to self-determination could evidence change of
the US policy. “Of course, we welcome Congressmen’s interest toward
various foreign policy issues, including this one. The US policy
towards NK and efforts aimed at its settlement have not changed,”
the State Department representative said.

LAND SALES IN REMOTE CALIFORNIA DESERT ARE QUESTIONED
Associated Press
San Luis Obispo Tribune, CA
Oct 4 2005
CALIFORNIA CITY, Calif. – Seda Shadkamyan paid $39,500 for a patch
of vacant land in the remote Kern County desert, hoping to pass on
something of value to her three children.
The county assessor determined the land was worth just $2,040.
“I feel used,” said Shadkamyan, an Armenian immigrant who lives
in Glendale. “My husband didn’t want it, but I forced him. It was
my mistake.”
Shadkamyan bought the land from Silver Saddle Ranch and Club, which
buys tax-defaulted land in California City at auctions and sells it
for up to 50 times what the Kern County Assessor’s Office considers
fair market value, according to a report in the Bakersfield Californian
that cited public records.
Another company, National Recreational Properties Inc., which uses
actor Erik Estrada as its television pitch man, has had a similar
operation since 2003 in the area about 100 miles north of Los Angeles,
records show.
Silver Saddle customers told the newspaper that the company marketed
itself in Korean newspapers, on Armenian-language television and
through Tagalog and Mandarin-speaking callers offering prizes. NRPI
markets itself in English and Spanish language television commercials
featuring Estrada.
Properties’ assessed values are publicly available, and representatives
from both companies said their sales practices are legitimate and
sales prices are fair.
“That’s the market,” said Silver Saddle sales manager Robert Kvassay.
But California City Mayor Larry Adams and other officials said
Silver Saddle’s sales tours, which show off new development in the
9,400-resident city, do not reflect conditions where the properties
are located. Adams said there’s no plan to install water lines,
electricity or paved roads into the area where Shadkamyan’s quarter
acre of desert and about 20,000 other parcels sit.
Several other people told the Californian they believe the companies
overcharged them for land purchases.
After buying a property from NRPI for $18,000 in 2004, Anaheim resident
Domingo Gomez said he was stunned to learn that he could acquire a
bigger and better located lot from Coldwell Banker for $9,500.
He said he reached a settlement with NRPI but was forbidden from
disclosing the terms.
“The company is bad to Spanish people,” said Gomez. “We got a little
money together and somebody took it.”

TURKEY, EUROPEAN UNION A PROBLEMATIC BID FOR MEMBERSHIP
Monday Morning, Lebanon
Oct 3 2005
The fifteenth-century Topkapi Palace in Istanbul during a
thunderstorm. Will Turkey’s membership bid be scuttled by deep-rooted
historical animosities?
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw: “Anchor Turkey in the West and
we gain a beacon of democracy and modernity, a country with a Muslim
majority, which will be a shining example across the whole of its
neighboring region”
Talks on Turkey’s membership of the European Union were scheduled
to begin this week, but differences remain over whether the country
can ever actually join the bloc could yet torpedo membership. Four
decades after Ankara first knocked on the European club’s door, the
negotiations — likely to last at least a decade — are scheduled
to begin in the sidelines of a meeting of EU foreign ministers
in Luxembourg this week. While few really expect the talks to be
called off, frantic diplomacy seems set to continue down to the wire,
battling to overcome resistance notably by Austria to the proposed
“negotiating framework” for the mega-haggle.
Specifically Vienna — which openly opposes Turkey’s entry bid —
wants the EU to offer Ankara the prospect of something other than
full EU membership as the formal aim of its talks.
That demand led Turkey — no stranger to tough brinkmanship — to
warn last week that it may stay away from the talks if it deems the
negotiating terms unsatisfactory.
“It is out of the question that we accept any formula or suggestion
other than full membership,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Namik Tan
told reporters in Ankara.
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw — whose country is a staunch
supporter of Ankara’s bid, and who currently holds the EU’s presidency
— also warned last week that not to go ahead with the talks would
be a disaster.
“It would now be a huge betrayal of the hopes and expectations of
the Turkish people… if, at this crucial time, we turned our back
on Turkey,” he said.
Turkey first signed an association agreement with the EU’s predecessor
in 1963, and has been a formal EU candidate since 1999.
Last December EU leaders gave Ankara a green light to start talks on
October 3.
But strains flared in July when Ankara, while signing an amended
customs accord with the EU, reaffirmed its refusal to recognize Cyprus,
one of 10 countries which joined the EU last year.
Last month EU states finally hammered out a formal response to that,
calling it regrettable and provocative, although in the end only asking
that Turkey recognize the Nicosia government before it actually joins
the EU.
But days before the talks were due to start, the negotiating framework
still remained unresolved. Amid the Austrian refusal to countenance
full membership, a meeting of foreign ministers was called for the
weekend preceding the opening of the formal talks.
While Austria remained tightlipped, observers suggested Vienna was
using the veiled threat of a veto on Turkey to push the EU to open
talks with Croatia, delayed since March due to lack of progress in
finding a key war crimes suspect.
Turkey meanwhile was playing hardball, saying it would only decide
whether to come to Luxembourg once it had seen what was on the table.
The EU-Turkey talks come amid clear public opposition to Turkey’s
EU hopes: a Eurobarometer poll in July indicated that 52 percent
of Europeans are against offering EU entry to Turkey, with only 35
percent in favor.
But Britain’s Straw, who would host the Luxembourg talks, reiterated
London’s geopolitical argument for Turkish EU entry.
“Anchor Turkey in the West and we gain a beacon of democracy and
modernity, a country with a Muslim majority, which will be a shining
example across the whole of its neighboring region,” he declared.
As the diplomatic activity continues, Turks appear to be losing their
enthusiasm for EU membership amid increasing doubts on whether their
mainly Muslim country will ever be welcome in the bloc and mounting
pressure on Ankara to tackle its most nationally explosive issues,
analysts say.
Ankara’s four-decade drive to join the European Union has always
enjoyed strong public support, but the latest polls suggest a
significant drop as the country gears up for the accession talks.
A survey released in early September by the US-based German Marshall
Fund of some 1,000 Turks showed that only 63 percent believed EU
membership would be a good thing, compared to 73 percent last year.
The main reason for the sour mood is a mounting debate in Europe
on whether Turkey should actually become a member of the bloc,
and this is giving Turks the feeling they are being badly treated,
according to Cengiz Aktar, director of the EU Center at Istanbul’s
Bahcesehir University.
Rejection of the EU constitution in referenda in France and the
Netherlands earlier this year, influenced in part by opposition to
Turkey’s membership, has taken its toll on the euphoria in Turkey that
followed the EU’s commitment at a December 17 summit in Brussels to
begin accession talks.
In Germany, conservative leader Angela Merkel, whose Christian Union
bloc narrowly won the September 18 general election and is aiming to
lead a ruling coalition, has long wanted to offer Turkey a “privileged
partnership” rather than full membership.
In France another political heavyweight, Nicolas Sarkozy, president
of the ruling UMP party and a possible successor to President Jacques
Chirac, argues against opening membership talks with Turkey for the
immediate future.
“These are not the expressions of new partnership but of new animosity
— Turkey is presented a a bitter enemy of Europe,” Aktar said. “This
has created a bitter and negative environment of which even the most
pro-EU circles in Turkey have had enough.”
Adding to what appears to Turkey like a U-turn on the EU’s commitment
is increasing pressure on Ankara to take steps many would consider
betraying the country’s basic policies, said Cigdem Nas, of Marmara
University’s European Community Institute.
Tensions have flared over the divided island of Cyprus since July,
when Turkey extended a customs union agreement to the bloc’s 10
newest members, including Cyprus, but insisted the move did not
amount to recognition of the island’s internationally-acknowledged
Greek Cypriot administration.
The EU hit back by insisting on proper recognition.
Another hot topic is the massacres during World War I of Armenians
under the Ottoman Empire, forerunner of the modern Turkish Republic.
Armenians claim up to 1.5 million of their people were slaughtered
in an Ottoman “genocide”, a claim Turkey strongly rejects.
“Turkey is being gradually pushed into an internal settling of accounts
and this creates a backlash in a country where nationalism runs high
and the EU has come to symbolize all the foreign pressure on Ankara,”
Nas said.
The past few months have seen the rise of several new civic
organizations that take their names from armed resistance groups
that fought against Allied occupation during Turkey’s 1919-1922
independence war, and which say their aim is to save the country from
“treasonous collaborators”.
“Even though there is an ideological anti-EU movement in Turkey,
many know that the EU will be to the country’s benefit. So support
of EU membership will once again increase,” Nas predicted.
“But cornering Turkey on national issues such as Cyprus and the
Armenian massacres would lead to a further backlash,” she warned.

HAMSHEN AND HAMSHEN ARMENIANS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE TO BE HELD IN SOCHI
Pan Armenian
04.10.2005 10:19
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Hamshen and Hamshen Armenians international
scientific conference will be held in Sochi October 13-15, reported
the Yerkramas, the newspaper of Armenians of Russia. The conference
will be organized under the auspices of the Institute of History
of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia with active
support being provided by Sevan Armenian Cultural Society of Sochi. The
conference comprises scholars from Armenia, Russia, the US, Germany,
Iran. Hamshen: a historical and geographic outline, Hamshen Armenians,
Pont and Armenia in 1914-1921, Genocide of Hamshen Armenians in
1915-1923, Abkhazian Armenians on the threshold of 21st century,
Pont legacy in culture of Hamshen Armenians and Hemshils, Armenian
ethnic and religious element in Anatolia (1991-2005), Important
evidence of 1786 about Armenian Muslims of Hamshen and other reports
will be presented at the event. At the end of the conference ethnic
groups of Hamshen Armenians of the Black Sea coast of Kuban will give
a performance.

SYNOPSYS TAKES OVER HPL TECHNOLOGIES
channel-e, Europe
Oct 4 2005
Synopsys has taken over the Californiain HPL Technologies for a sum
of 13 million US$. HPL was founded in 1998 and offers software for
efficiency management as well as Test Chip solutions for semiconductor
and display production. Synopsis had already bought a participation of
29.9% of the company in June 2004. The end of year results of HPL in
March showed a turnover of 9.8 m US$ and a net loss of 9.4 m US$. The
European branches are situated in France and Armenia.
;id=392&backPID=600&tt_news=7143

VOICE OF THE FAITHFULL JOINS THE ORCHESTRA
By Andrea Rea
News Letter, UK
Oct 4 2005
It has been a busy time for the arts here recently, with performing
organisations professional, amateur and in between beginning their
season’s work and some companies already on tour. It’s hard sometimes
to decide which concert, recital or show to attend and now it’s
October, and soon there will be even more performances to tempt us.
The Belfast Festival at Queen’s opens its many doors in a few weeks,
and there are concerts, recitals, films, plays, exhibitions and
lectures to choose from. My advice would be to try and sample a bit
of everything. You’ll finish the fortnight a good deal more tired
than when you began it, but come away enriched and with a bit of luck,
challenged too. The brilliant thing about the festival is that it gives
you a chance to see and hear things you might not have experienced
before. For example, during the popular Music at Ten series in the
Harty Room, there’s a recital of baroque cello and theorbo and you
might not have heard a theorbo lately unless you managed to see Opera
Theatre Company’s recent production of Monteverdi, in which case you
saw two.
It looks like a huge lute and is a very interesting, versatile
instrument. In the same series there’s a concert of solo recorder
music – also something that doesn’t come around every day. The music
of Armenian/American composer Alan Hovhaness is being explored in
a concert at Clonard Monastery, with the Ulster Orchestra and the
Belfast Philharmonic choir.
Hovhaness writes extraordinarily beautiful music which prepared the
way for composers like PÂrt and Rautavaara, both of whom have been
featured in past Festivals.
One of the rock/classical crossovers is Sixties’ chanteuse Marianne
Faithfull at the opening concert, with the Ulster Orchestra and
Renaissance Singers, but for more challenging stuff, be sure to get
to at least one of the performances listed under the New Music section
of the Festival programme.
Quite a few of these revolve around the music of Steve Reich,
the experimental and original American composer who celebrates his
60th birthday next year. Reich once described hearing music he was
unfamiliar with as ‘suddenly walking into a room you’d never been
in before and wanting to stay forever’. Reich’s own music has been
described as minimalist, using percussion effects and phasing, as
well as aspects of Western classical music and vernacular and ethnic
material. His large work for orchestra and choir, The Desert Music,
is being performed as part of the closing concert of the Festival.
The choir in question will be the National Chamber Choir, who gave
a concert in St George’s Church in Belfast last Friday night.
It was a bit like a whole festival in one performance, so varied was
the programme, although with an overall theme. The concert Motets and
the Bard examined the marriage of words and music in motets composed
over the course of five centuries or so. The National Chamber Choir
has always been known for its ability to manage an extraordinarily
wide range of repertoire, and this concert showcased that ability
wonderfully.
Their conductor Celso Antunes gets quite a red-blooded sound from them,
and makes clever and often essential use of different arrangements of
singers on stage. The singers themselves come from diverse backgrounds
and cultures. In addition to Ireland north and south, the countries
of Poland, New Zealand, Latvia and Holland are represented by choir
members, all of whom live in Ireland now. The concert was stunningly
well-presented and an eye and ear opener for anyone there. Do try
to hear them at the Festival, and while you’re at it, have a go at
something else that takes you off the beaten track. You’ll be glad
you did.
–Boundary_(ID_9bWzkbit+Xy55ii6cwVLZw)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

GEORGIAN OPPOSITION PARTY ASKS NOBEL INSTITUTE NOT TO AWARD NOBEL PEACE PRIZE TO SAAKASHVILI
Armenpress
Oct 4, 2005
TBILISI, OCTOBER 4, ARMENPRESS: A Georgian opposition party has sent a
letter to the Nobel Institute in Norway asking it ‘not to award the 2005
Peace Prize to Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili.”
Shalva Natelashvili, the chairman of the Labor Party, said the party
asked the Novel Institute that is to convene on October 7 to decide the
winner, ‘to examine Georgian president’s performance, who is trying to build
an authoritarian regime violating basic human rights and freedoms.”
Saakashvili and Ukraine’s president Viktor Yuschenko had been nominated for
the Nobel Peace Prize earlier this year by U.S. Senators Hillary Clinton
(D-NY) and John McCain (R-AZ).
Clinton and McCain sent a letter to the Nobel Institute in Norway saying
Yushchenko and Saakashvili had played historic roles in the lives of their
countries ‘displaying an extraordinary commitment to peace.” “Awarding the
Nobel Peace Prize to these two men would instill hope and inspiration in
those seeking freedom in other countries that lack it,” their letter said.

STRAW: “WE HAVE JUST MADE HISTORY”
EurActiv.com, Belgium
Oct 4 2005
In Short:
The formal opening of accession negotiations with Turkey was marked
by praise but also scepticism and accusations of backroom deals.
Background:
Turkey first applied for membership of the EU in 1963. In 1999, the
EU said yes, and the decision to open accession talks with Ankara on
3 October 2005 was reached at the December 2004 European Council.
Formal negotiations, which began on 3 October could take between 10 to
15 years, and the outcome is uncertain. During last-minute wrangling,
Austria had demanded that the EU offer a special partnership deal
rather than full membership to Ankara
During the lengthy negotiations ahead, the most controversial issues
in Turkey’s modern-day history are bound to come to the fore, including
the Cyprus conflict and the Armenian and Kurdish problems.
Meanwhile, thousands of Turks took to the streets of Ankara last
weekend protesting against their country’s projected accession to the
EU. The crowds assailed the government for creating and tolerating
“an environment of enmity from outside and an environment of treason
from within”.
Issues:
The prolonged dispute among the EU-25 foreign ministers revolved around
the clause in the EU-Turkey negotiating framework which defines the
objective of the negotiations.
Under the final agreement that was reached after more than a day of
straight debate, the text conserves the original wording that “The
shared objective of the negotiations is [Turkey’s] accession”. The
agreed text also adds that “”While having full regard to all [EU
political criteria], including the absorption capacity of the Union,
if Turkey is not in a position to assume in full all the obligations
of membership it must be ensured that Turkey is fully anchored in
the European structures through the strongest possible bond”.
Ankara was also concerned about the paragraph (No 5) in the draft
negotiating framework which insisted that Turkey “progressively align”
its policies in international organisations with that of the EU. This
paragraph was feared in Ankara to eventually allow Cyprus to join
NATO. However, the dispute on this point was finally settled after
Turkey received reassurance from lawyers as well as from US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice that NATO was not an issue in the EU talks.
Positions:
Opening the first – symbolic – meeting of the accession negotiation
process in the small hours of 4 October, British Foreign Minister
Jack Straw said that “We have just made history”.
“There’s a lot of speculation about the open-ended business,”
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. “Every negotiation
is open-ended, but has goals. Full membership is the objective of
this one. The achievement of this goal will depend on our success”
in [carrying out the negotiations].
Turkey’s Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said that the conclusion was a
“win-win” situation for all sides concerned, and stressed that Turkey
was “determined the carry on with the reforms”. He added that “Some
of the concerns which exist in European public opinion will, I think,
change in 10 years.”
Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn commented that the opening of
talks marked a “new era” in the EU’s ties with Turkey.
The speaker of Turkey’s parliament, Bulent Arinc, said that Turkey
would not “sacrifice everything”, including self-esteem, to become
a member of the EU.
“(For) the citizens of Europe … we have shown they cannot simply
be steam-rollered,” said Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schussel,
who added that he was “proud” of his country’s tough position.
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said that “It’s a historic
step Europe has won; it’s a big chance for both sides”.
In Paris, Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said that the French have
“serious reservations” and would prefer a partnership.
“Any (EU) state at any stage can interrupt the talks, for whatever
reason,” said French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy. “The
result of these negotiations is absolutely not guaranteed,” he said.
“If it’s not accession, it’ll be another strong link.”
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said that the negotiations
will be “long and difficult” and added that “accession, as for every
country, is neither guaranteed nor automatic”. “Europe must learn more
about Turkey. And Turkey must win the hearts and minds of European
citizens. They are the ones who at the end of the day will decide
about Turkey’s membership.”
“A Turkey anchored in Europe will be an even more reliable partner for
the trans-Atlantic family and a positive force for advancing peace,
prosperity and democracy,” the US State Department said.
MEP Graham Watson, leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats
in the European Parliament welcomed the agreement, saying that
“The prospect before us now is not the accession of today’s Turkey
but that of tomorrow’s Turkey – of 2015 or 2020”. At the same time,
“However, the process leaves a smell of a back room deal”, Watson said,
referring to the simultaneous decision to open accession talks with
Croatia. “Three days ago, the [International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia] chief prosecutor stated her dissatisfaction
with Croatian compliance. What has suddenly changed?
A political trade-off on matters as serious as enlargement ill-befits a
Union desperately in need of restoring credibility with its citizens,”
he said.
Speaking to Belgian television, former Competition Commissioner Karel
Van Miert called the opening of negotiations with Turkey a “drama”
for Europe. Not only will it lead to years of political fighting
between current member states over Turkey but in the end, several
populations will in referenda reject the outcome of the negotiations
and thereby start a new crisis, he said. The EU should have won back
citizens trust in its project first, Van Miert added.
Portuguese Foreign Minister Diogo Freitas do Amaral said the deal
“probably will displease Mr [Osama] bin Laden”, referring to al
Qaeda’s campaign to stem Western influence and spread Islamic rule.
Latest & next steps:
-The symbolic launch of negotiations on 3 October signalled the start
of the Commission’s screening process aimed at taking stock of Turkey’s
progress in harmonising its laws with those of the Union.
– This process may take up to six months to complete.
– On 9 November, the Commission is scheduled to issue its next annual
progress report on Turkey.
– On 1 January 2006, Austria takes over the rotating Presidency of
the EU
– Mid-2006: the conclusion of the screening process will mark the
opening of negotiations on the individual “chapters”. The negotiating
framework specifies 35 chapters.
– The accession talks have been defined as an “open-ended process”
that may last from ten up to 15 years.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress