CONTROVERSIAL ARMENIAN CONFERENCE ENDS WITHOUT MAJOR TURMOIL
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Sept 26 2005
* Conference runs peacefully despite protests
* Oran: End of another taboo in Turkey
ISTANBUL – The once postponed and then later suspended conference on
“Armenians in the Late Ottoman Era” opened in Istanbul on Saturday
under high security and amidst protests by some 300 people holding
banners and Turkish flags.
The self-avowed goal of the conference was to call into question the
official Turkish account of events. It was to be held in May but was
postponed amidst a hail of criticism, and was suspended again by an
Istanbul court on Thursday, hours before it was scheduled to start.
The scene at Bilgi University, which agreed to host the conference,
was quite typical of any controversial event in any democratic country,
with protesters chanting and rotten eggs flying, despite the air of
extraordinary sentimentality and strict security measures.
Only those with invitations were admitted to the university campus
during the conference while protestors, members of the press, and
security forces were stationed outside the gates. Some of the banners
read: “Turkish diplomats, victims of the Armenian slaughters, may
you sleep in peace for we’re on guard,” and, “One-sided thesis is
not academic.”
Professor Erdal Inonu, a senior statesman and former leader of the
Social Democrat People’s Party (SHP), who attended the conference
as a member of the audience, was heckled at the gate, while another
group of protestors shouted at Inonu, saying, “Dear Inonu, don’t go
among those traitors.”
Independent Turkish Orthodox Patriarchate representative Sevgi
Erenerol made a statement saying that Turks didn’t commit genocide
at any point in their history, and that, on the contrary, they were
victims of genocide themselves in various parts of the world.
Academics, as well as a majority of the media, expressed bitter
frustration at the judiciary’s intervention in the event. Not only did
the efforts to block the conference hamper efforts for democratization
and freedom of speech in Turkey on its road to the EU, they said,
but the persistence of these efforts also magnifies the significance
of the conference and its content.
A protestor told TNA that the goal was merely to bring the so-called
Armenian genocide to the public’s attention to stir up the country
and that the meeting was one-sided and non-academic. “It’s illegal to
say there was no genocide in many European countries,” he contested,
“but in Turkey it’s open to discussion. Are we a more democratic
country then?”
The question may be worthwhile, and the fact that the conference did
actually take place without any involved parties resorting to violence
may be a step in the right direction. As Professor Baskin Oran said
this may also be a breakthrough for Turkey in the realm of breaking
taboos and proves that things don’t go awry when people speak.

PETITIONERS RUSH TO RESTORE L.A. COUNTY CROSS BEFORE DEADLINE
Christian Post, CA
Sept 26 2005
LOS ANGELES – The committee spearheading the initiative to restore
the cross on the L.A. County Seal must submit over 170,000 petition
signatures to the County’s Register Recorder Office by 5:00 p.m.
today to qualify the measure for the June 2006 ballot.
“Every signature counts. It doesn’t matter if it’s last minute,”
David Hernandez, chairman of the Committee to Support the Los Angeles
County Seal Ordinance, told the Christian Post Sunday night.
According to the group’s website on Monday morning, the absolute
deadline to submit petition signatures to the group’s headquarters in
Sylmar in North San Fernando Valley will be Monday afternoon at two
o’clock. Representatives of the Committee plan to make a 15-minute
stop at the L.A. County Republican Party Headquarters in Commerce
before heading to the County’s Register Recorder Office in Norwalk.
“We don’t want to take any chances, considering traffic,” Hernandez
continued. “We had hoped to be done two weeks ago but things didn’t
work out that way.”
Numbers on the Committee’s website on Sunday report that 122,414
signatures have been collected – leaving 47,586 remaining to meet
the petition signature quota.
Although the pressure of meeting the impending deadline has been
growing, local churches and registered L.A. County voters have risen
to the call.
Churches from all over L.A. County used Sunday masses and services
as opportunities to collect last-minute signatures from congregants.
Among them were Crenshaw Christian Center in Los Angeles and St.
Monica’s in Santa Monica. According to Hernandez, Catholic churches
and groups such as the Knights of Columbus have been really engaged
in the effort.
Specific numbers are yet to be finalized from the churches’ petitions
but Hernandez estimated around 5,000 signatures were tallied up at a
petition drop-off site at his home and around 2,500 – 3,000 more were
gathered during a petition signing event at an Armenian Independence
Day celebration at Verdugo Park in Glendale on Sunday.
Hernandez said Armenians could empathize with the attack on the L.A.
County Seal because they experienced religious persecution firsthand
during 1915 when 1.5 million Armenians died in genocide at the hands
of Ottoman Turkish forces. An article published in The Middle East
Quarterly reported that several hundred thousand Christians died by
starvation or were murdered during the deportation of the Armenians
from Anatolia to the Syrian Desert and elsewhere in 1915-16.
“Most Americans don’t understand religious persecution. We don’t
have the historical reference like the Armenian community or the
Jewish community have. When we think about persecution, it’s not in
the same context,” he said. “Here you have a culture where you had
what religious persecution could lead to and did lead to.”
Hernandez said he had hoped the Armenian community could help educate
Americans on the dangers of religious persecution. Because people
are unaware of the issue, efforts to garner enough signatures in last
two petitions drives were unsuccessful, he added.
The L.A. County Board of Directors voted to replace the 1957 version
of the Seal after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) threatened
suit unless the cross was removed from the Seal, alleging the cross
was a government endorsement of religion.
Supporters of cross including County Supervisors Mike Antonovich and
Don Knabeargue, who voted against its removal, argue that the cross
is a cultural and historical symbol.
Hernandez said he has seen people work their hearts out but noted
that regardless of the outcome, “We have no regrets.”
More information on the petition drive can be found at the
Committee to Support the Los Angeles County Seal Ordinance website,

LES JUGES TURCS REFUSENT LE DEBAT SUR LE GENOCIDE ARMENIEN
Istanbul : Marie-Michèle Martinet
Le Figaro, France
24 septembre 2005
TURQUIE A quelques jours de l’ouverture des negociations d’adhesion
A quelques jours de l’ouverture des negociations d’adhesion entre
l’Union europeenne et Ankara, Jacques Chirac s’est dit satisfait
de la reponse apportee par les Vingt-Cinq a la Turquie après son
refus de reconnaître Chypre. ” La contre-declaration de l’Union
europeenne repond aux preoccupations francaises “, a affirme le
president francais.
Le genocide armenien reste decidement un sujet tabou en Turquie. Pour
la deuxième fois en moins de six mois, une conference organisee
conjointement, a ce sujet, par deux prestigieuses universites
stambouliotes, vient d’etre suspendue par la justice turque. Cette
decision, prise a la veille de l’ouverture des negociations d’adhesion
europeenne de la Turquie prevue le 3 octobre, suscite de nouvelles
interrogations sur la capacite d’Ankara a s’engager dans un veritable
processus democratique. A l’occasion du 90 e anniversaire du genocide
armenien celebre en avril dernier, les universitaires turcs avaient
cru possible d’ouvrir enfin le debat, en Turquie.
L’idee etait simple : inviter une soixantaine d’intellectuels
critiques a exposer leur analyse sur les massacres de 1915, dont
Ankara se refuse toujours a admettre le caractère genocidaire.
Programmee pour le 25 mai, la conference fut suspendue a la dernière
minute, sous l’impulsion du ministre de la Justice, Cemil Cicek,
qui declarait alors qu’un tel debat ne pouvait avoir lieu car
il constituait une offense a la nation, un “coup de poignard dans
le dos du peuple turc”. Quelques mois plus tard, le meme scenario
vient de se reproduire : a la suite d’une plainte deposee par des
juristes, le tribunal administratif d’Istanbul a annonce jeudi soir
la suspension d’une conference dont l’ouverture etait prevue pour le
lendemain matin. “Nous regrettons vivement cette nouvelle tentative
d’empecher la societe turque d’avoir un debat sur son histoire.
Nous considerons egalement que le timing de cette decision, un
jour seulement avant la date prevue de la conference, ressemble
a une nouvelle provocation”, a declare hier la porte-parole du
commissaire europeen a l’Elargissement, Olli Rehn. Krisztina Nagy
evoque egalement les “difficultes de la Turquie, et en particulier de
son système judiciaire, a assurer une application reelle et constante
des reformes”. On peut s’interroger sur les intentions reelles de
ceux qui, en prononcant cette interdiction a quelques jours de la
date cruciale du 3 octobre, compliquent indiscutablement la tâche
des diplomates turcs, deja embarrasses par la delicate question de la
reconnaissance de Chypre. Veulent-ils purement et simplement saboter
le dialogue difficilement engage entre la Turquie et l’Europe ? Le
premier ministre turc, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, dont l’avenir politique
reste très lie au succès des negociations, a condamne la decision des
juges : “La cour a jete une ombre sur le processus de democratisation
et sur les libertes dans mon pays”, a-t-il declare, en s’interrogeant
au passage sur les competences du tribunal. En decembre prochain,
le romancier turc Orhan Pamuk, dont les livres sont publies en France
par Gallimard, sera juge pour avoir affirme, dans un journal suisse,
qu’ “un million d’Armeniens et trente mille Kurdes ont ete tues
en Turquie”. Ces propos, consideres comme une insulte a l’identite
turque, peuvent lui valoir une peine de six a neuf mois de prison,
conformement au nouveau Code penal. Le Parlement europeen a deja
fait savoir qu’il designerait des observateurs pour s’assurer du
bon deroulement de ce procès, ce qui exaspère de nombreux Turcs qui
voient dans cette demarche une volonte d’ingerence de l’Europe :
“Arretez de faire d’Orhan Pamuk un faux heros !” s’insurge Bedri
Baykam, qui dirige le très kemaliste Mouvement patriotrique,
proche du principal parti d’opposition CHP. Cet agitateur politique
precise cependant qu’il n’approuve pas l’interdiction prononcee par
la justice turque parce qu’elle “va faire du tort a la Turquie en
flattant ses ennemis”. Pour cette raison, “il aurait fallu qu’un vrai
debat democratique s’engage…” , regrette-t-il, en deplorant dans
le meme temps que les historiens defenseurs de la version officielle
turque n’aient pas ete invites a la conference d’Istanbul. Soucieux
des consequences de cette nouvelle crise armenienne qui ravive les
crispations nationalistes dans le pays, Hrant Dink, le redacteur
en chef du journal bilingue Agos, publie en turc et en armenien,
s’efforce de calmer le jeu : “Il n’y a rien a dire pour le moment,
a-t-il prudemment declare. Il faut surtout garder son calme et
reflechir a ce qui vient de se passer.” Jusqu’a present, la communaute
armenienne de Turquie s’est declaree favorable a l’adhesion a l’Europe,
sachant qu’un tel ancrage serait la meilleure protection pour l’avenir
des minorites dans le pays.
–Boundary_(ID_2+V5W8mKCqieomUr3k9RFQ)–

TURKEY’S EU MEMBERSHIP “POLITICALLY UNATTAINABLE OBJECTIVE” – NATO’S LELLOUCHE
Liberation, Paris, in French
26 Sep 05
Text of commentary by Pierre Lellouche, chairman of NATO Parliamentary
Assembly, entitled “Turkey’s missed appointment” published by French
newspaper Liberation website on 26 September
Turkey’s EU membership negotiations, which are due to start on 3
October, raise a fundamental question in two respects: for Turkey,
a great Muslim country, the question of its European destiny; and
for each of the EU member states, that of our vision of Europe,
its founding values and its proper borders.
The prospect of Europe’s engaging – almost underhand and without
any democratic consultation – in a mechanism that would lead,
almost automatically, to Turkey’s accession probably contributed
to the victory of the “No” vote in the referendum [on the European
Constitution]. Not that the opening of these negotiations, scheduled
following a European Council decision, has been any more or less
transparent than in the case of other EU enlargements. The reasons
for the very negative perception that many people in France form
of Turkey’s candidacy in most cases has nothing to do with the real
nature of that country today. It has to do first and foremost with
fear of Islam, which is linked to the failure or difficulty of the
integration of our Arab-Maghrebi communities in our own city areas.
At a time when France is becoming aware of the scale of the Muslim
minority in the country (at least 10 per cent of the population,)
when it is worried about jihadists groups recruiting on its own
territory, when it is difficult to ensure observance of the law even
in our schools, and when immigration seems to be increasingly “out of
control” in a Europe that no longer really knows where its borders
lie, was it really impossible to find anything better to do than to
allow a further 70 million – soon to be 100 million – Muslims in?
Voters could not understand it, since our government failed to realize
the scale of the problem properly and, even more, failed to prepare
the public in advance for decisions that had long been scheduled, since
the Helsinki Council session of 1999 and that of 2002 in Copenhagen.
I was among those in favour of the principle of launching negotiations
with Turkey and, in time, if the conditions were met, of its possible
membership. I thought that it was a question of civilization: either
we thought, a priori, that there is no place for the Muslims in Europe,
irrespective of what they might do and irrespective of their political,
economic and social system and accepted in advance – even within our
own societies – the “conflict of civilizations” that some predict;
or we decided to attempt the experiment, in order to establish
democracy in that secular Muslim country, and tried to promote, in
opposition to the regressive model that the Bin-Ladins, al-Zawahiris
and other all-Zarqawi-type murderers were trying to impose by means
of terror, the alternative model of an open, tolerant Islam, confined
to the private sphere and compatible with our own values. This still
remains a challenge of prime importance for us, following the attacks
in Madrid and then those in London this July. And in this worldwide
struggle against terrorism and jihadist radicalism, we need the help
of a pro-Western Turkey living in accordance with European values.
But in order for such a politically and social sensitive process to be
conducted successfully in the long term, at least two key factors had
to be satisfied: Turkey had to join the negotiations on our conditions
and not its own, that is, without ambiguities and while adopting the
European democratic spirit and attitude; and, second, Europe itself had
to be able to manage such an enlargement, as great in demographic scale
(not to mention the cultural and religious differences) as that which
we have recently accomplished with the 80 million East Europeans. It
must be acknowledged that neither of these conditions has yet been met.
It is of course undeniable that Mr Erdogan’s Turkey has, within the
space of a few years, accomplished real progress in terms of democratic
development and human rights observance, the famous “Copenhagen
criteria”. The adoption in 2003-2004 of a number of constitutional
and legislative changes and the transposition of communitaire gains,
have considerably strengthened Turkey’s candidacy.
The European Council, on the [European] Commission’s recommendation,
therefore decided in Brussels last December to start membership
negotiations in October 2005 – on certain conditions, however. In
particular, the Presidency’s conclusions mentioned the need for Turkey,
following the latest EU enlargement, “to sign the additional protocol
to the Ankara agreement, so as to take account of the accession of 10
new member states” – including Cyprus – and this, “before the actual
start of membership negotiations”. Now, Turkey did indeed sign the
additional protocol on 29 June, but it did so under conditions that,
politically if not juridically, undermined the significance of that
move. Indeed, in a unilateral declaration tantamount to a reservation,
Turkey said that its signature “did not at all signify any recognition
of the Republic of Cyprus, as mentioned in the protocol”.
So the recognition of Cyprus expected by Europe has not occurred.
This is disappointing, particularly in view of the constructive
attitude that Mr Erdogan’s government had maintained in facilitating
the talks conducted under UN auspices, which resulted in the “Annan
plan” for the island’s reunification. The fact that the majority of
Greek Cypriots rejected that plan, in a referendum in April 2004,
and therefore prevented the solution of the Cyprus conflict, cannot
however free Ankara from its obligation to normalize its relations
with Nicosia. And despite the counter-declarations formulated at
the last moment in Brussels, can we really imagine the Twenty-Five
engaging in negotiations – on the issue of membership, moreover –
with a state that does not recognize one of their own number? Can
we be satisfied with such contortions, whereas in the case of little
Croatia Europe has decided to set back the start of negotiations until
the Croatian government has handed over a war criminal wanted by the
ICTY [International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia],
[fugitive General] Ante Gotovina? The difference of treatment would
be truly shocking..
But this is not the most serious point. The European public, especially
in France, expected – again rightly – a gesture from Turkey in
connection with the Armenian genocide of 1915 and relations with
independent Armenia. Turkey can indeed say that such a gesture is
not mentioned – and I regret the fact – in the conditions expressly
set by the European Council. But we cannot build the future on a
denial of history and a negotiation of past crimes, even if they were
committed by previous generations and under a different political
regime, in this instance the Ottoman Empire. There is no point in
evading responsibilities towards History: better to acknowledge, to
mend and to be reconciled. Germany fully realized this following 1945
and this is what made possible its involvement, with equal rights,
in European building.
Of course a great deal of political courage is needed in order to
surmount the burden of mentalities, taboos or state lies, which in
fact now undermines the interests of this state and its inhabitants.
Some first steps are probably necessary, such as the holding in
Turkey of an initial conference mainly devoted to the issue of the
Armenian genocide, such as that which was originally cancelled at
the authorities’ request and which was at last able to materialize
in Istanbul this weekend. But it is necessary to go much further, to
have the courage at last to recognize the reality of what occurred,
with no trickery, no false pride and no ill-placed arrogance. Rather
than harping on old enmities, it is high time that Turkey’s leaders
built a better future for future generations. This also entails
normalizing diplomatic relations and opening Turkey’s land border
with this country, which is still an enclave and access to which is
possible only via Iran or Georgia. Here, too, we have awaited a gesture
from the Turkish government for the past 10 years – sadly, in vain!
I consider it premature to start membership negotiations with Turkey
on 3 October, in the absence of strong political gesture in connection
with the recognition of Cyprus or the Armenian question.
And on this point I can only side with the opinion of the majority
of my fellow UMP [Union for a Popular Movement] members and their
chairman, in thinking that, rather than focusing on a politically
unattainable objective, we should pragmatically establish an ambitious
strategic partnership with this country, strengthening our ties in
the fields of defence, security and the antiterrorist struggle.

UNE CONFERENCE SUR LE GENOCIDE ARMENIEN PROVOQUE UNE NOUVELLE BOUFFEE NATIONALISTE
par Marie-Michèle Martinet
Le Figaro, France
24 septembre 2005
TURQUIE A quelques jours de l’ouverture des negociations d’adhesion a
l’Union europeenne
Le genocide armenien reste decidement un sujet tabou en Turquie. Pour
la deuxième fois en moins de six mois, une conference organisee
sur ce thème par deux prestigieuses universites stambouliotes,
a ete suspendue… avant d’etre finalement reprogrammee, in
extremis, dans une troisième universite de la ville. Cette nouvelle
bouffee nationaliste, qui intervient a la veille de l’ouverture des
negociations d’adhesion europeenne de la Turquie prevue le 3 octobre,
suscite certaines interrogations sur la capacite d’Ankara a s’engager
dans un veritable processus democratique.
A l’occasion du 90 e anniversaire du genocide armenien celebre en avril
dernier, les universitaires turcs avaient cru possible d’ouvrir enfin
le debat, en Turquie, plutôt que de continuer a balayer les miettes
de l’histoire sous le tapis de la mauvaise conscience. L’idee etait
simple : inviter une soixantaine d’intellectuels critiques a exposer
leur analyse sur les massacres de 1915, dont Ankara se refuse toujours
a admettre le caractère genocidaire.
Programmee pour le 25 mai, la conference fut suspendue a la dernière
minute, sous l’impulsion du ministre de la Justice, Cemil Cicek,
qui declarait alors qu’un tel debat ne pouvait avoir lieu car il
constituait une offense a la nation, un ” coup de poignard dans
le dos du peuple turc “. Quelques mois plus tard, le meme scenario
vient de se reproduire : a la suite d’une plainte deposee par des
juristes, le tribunal administratif d’Istanbul annoncait jeudi soir
la suspension de cette conference, dont l’ouverture etait prevue pour
le lendemain matin.
Hier soir, nouveau rebondissement : a la suite de vives protestations,
tant de l’Union europeenne qu’au plus haut niveau du pouvoir
gouvernemental turc, la conference etait finalement maintenue :
les debats s’ouvriront donc ce matin, a l’heure dite, mais dans une
autre universite, celle de Bilgi qui n’est pas concernee par l’ordre
de suspension.
L’honneur est donc sauf. Il n’empeche que ces blocages a repetition,
dignes d’un mauvais theâtre de boulevard, qui interviennent a la
veille de l’ouverture des negociations europeennes de la Turquie,
prevue pour le 3 octobre, reactivent certaines interrogations sur
la capacite d’Ankara a engager un veritable processus democratique
dans le pays : ” Nous regrettons vivement cette nouvelle tentative
d’empecher la societe turque d’avoir un debat sur son histoire “,
declarait hier Krisztina Nagy.
La porte-parole du commissaire europeen a l’Elargissement, Olli Rehn,
qualifie la decision des juges turcs de ” nouvelle provocation ”
illustrant les ” difficultes de la Turquie, et en particulier de son
système judiciaire, a assurer une application reelle et constante
des reformes “.
On peut s’interroger sur les intentions reelles de ceux qui, en
s’efforcant de jouer le blocage a quelques jours de la date cruciale
du 3 octobre, compliquent indiscutablement la tâche des diplomates
turcs, deja embarrasses par la delicate question de la reconnaissance
de Chypre. Veulent-ils purement et simplement saboter le dialogue
difficilement engage entre la Turquie et l’Europe ? Le premier ministre
turc, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, dont l’avenir politique reste très lie au
succès des negociations, avait sevèrement condamne, dès jeudi soir,
la decision des juges : ” La cour a jete une ombre sur le processus de
democratisation et sur les libertes dans mon pays “, a-t-il declare,
en s’interrogeant au passage sur les competences du tribunal.
En decembre prochain, le romancier turc, Orhan Pamuk, dont les livres
sont publies en France par Gallimard, sera juge pour avoir affirme,
dans un journal suisse, qu’ ” un million d’Armeniens et trente mille
Kurdes ont ete tues en Turquie “. Ces propos, consideres comme une
insulte a l’identite turque, peuvent lui valoir une peine de six a
neuf mois de prison, conformement au nouveau Code penal.
Le Parlement europeen a deja fait savoir qu’il designerait des
observateurs pour s’assurer du bon deroulement de ce procès, ce
qui exaspère de nombreux Turcs qui voient, dans cette demarche, une
volonte d’ingerence de l’Europe : ” Arretez de faire de Orhan Pamuk un
faux heros ! “, s’insurge Bedri Baykam, qui dirige le très kemaliste
Mouvement patriotique, proche du principal parti d’opposition, CHP.
Soucieux des consequences de cette nouvelle crise armenienne ravivant
les crispations nationalistes dans le pays, Hrant Dink, le redacteur
en chef du journal bilingue Agos, publie en turc et en armenien,
s’est efforce de calmer le jeu, en appelant ses interlocuteurs au
calme et a la reflexion. Jusqu’a present, la communaute armenienne
de Turquie s’est declaree favorable a l’adhesion a l’Europe, sachant
qu’un tel ancrage serait la meilleure protection pour l’avenir des
minorites dans le pays.
–Boundary_(ID_Is/SAmRZYmSeoBGFUd4zzA)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

GEORGIAN PRESIDENT VISITS ETHNIC MINORITY SCHOOLS
Rustavi-2 TV, Tbilisi, in Georgian
26 Sep 05
[Presenter] A new school year has begun in Georgia and new school
buildings have been built in the city. President [Mikheil] Saakashvili
this morning attended the opening of a new building for the Armenian
School No 98.
The construction of a European-standard building for the Armenian
school began in March 2004. Three hundred and fifty children will
study there. Education Minister Kakha Lomaia and mayor Gigi Ugulava
accompanied Saakashvili at the opening of the new building for School
No 98.
[Saakashvili, addressing school-goers] It is a great honour to open
this building. We have resumed the construction of school buildings
that stopped in Georgia many years ago. For us this school is a symbol
of the changes that have occurred in Georgia.
The previous government released funds for the construction of
a building for this school several times. All of that money was
misappropriated. We began the construction of this building in March
[2004], together with the then head of the city government, Bidzina
Bregadze, and we finished it, as promised, by 1 September.
I would like this school, with its most beautiful building and
ultra-modern classrooms worthy of any European capital, to raise
generations of children who will love their culture, their roots and
their country, our homeland Georgia.
[Correspondent] From there the president went to the Azerbaijani
School No 73 in Grishashvili Street. [Passage omitted]
[Ramiz Hasanov, Azerbaijan’s ambassador to Georgia, in Russian]
We took a decision to refurbish this building a little bit. It was
a minor refurbishment project. We didn’t have time to do everything.

AZERI ELECTION: OPPOSITION CANDIDATES URGE AUTHORITIES TO RESIGN
ITV, Baku, in Azeri
26 Sep 05
Azerbaijani Public TV relayed its first debate among representatives
of the ruling New Azerbaijan Party (NAP), the Liberal Party of
Azerbaijan and the opposition Azadliq, Yeni Siyasat blocs at 1600
gmt on 25 September.
The TV debate was dedicated to the socio-economic situation in
Azerbaijan.
Akif Sahbazov from the Azadliq election bloc said that the government
and people represented in the Azerbaijani government are more
interested in their own affairs rather than in the interests of
the government.
Sahbazov said the country’s prime minister and his team were not
capable of conducting any reform. He ruled out any progress in the
economic and other spheres if the current authorities did not change.
Vahid Axundov from the Yeni Siyasat election bloc said that Azerbaijan
has a problem of unemployment and the only way of dealing with the
issue was to ensure that big enterprises resume their work.
He said that along with the oil sector, all other spheres should
develop.
He said that monopolies and poor credit markets damage Azerbaijan’s
economy. He urged the Azerbaijani government to resign and said that
a new cabinet should be formed.
Mubariz Qurbanli from the NAP accused the opposition of using all
means possible to discredit the socio-economic development in the
country. He described as ridiculous a comparison of the Azerbaijani
and Armenian economies.
Avaz Temirxan from the Liberal Party of Azerbaijan quoted a
representative of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
in Baku as saying that there was no democratic environment for
businesses in Azerbaijan.
He said that Azerbaijan lags behind almost all the CIS countries for
its living standards and the average salary.
The deputy chairman of the Liberal Party said that monopolies,
corruption, bribery, misappropriation and officials’ arbitrariness
were the main reasons behind the poverty.
Video: candidates in a round-table studio format.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ACTING TO END GENOCIDE
By Scott Warren, Brown Daily Herald; SOURCE: Brown U.
Brown Daily Herald via U-Wire
University Wire
September 21, 2005 Wednesday
PROVIDENCE, R.I.
Four hundred thousand are dead. Five hundred more are dying every
day. This is the current situation in Darfur, Sudan, where a
government-sponsored genocide has decimated the population.
Government planes destroy villages, militias rape women and upwards of
3 million people have lost their homes. The international community, in
a virtual repetition of its behavior during previous ethnic cleansing
campaigns in Rwanda, Cambodia and Armenia, stands idly to the side.
Just one week ago at the United Nations, President Bush said that
Americans have a responsibility to “protect the lives and rights of
others … and ensure that every human being enjoys the peace and
freedom and the dignity our creator intended for all.” These bold and
powerful words ring hollow when it comes to the innocent Darfurians.
Although the United States has given much humanitarian assistance to
Darfur, our efforts end after reaching into our pockets. We have not
taken a hard stance with the Sudanese government, constantly condemning
but never threatening more drastic action. One reason for this is
that the United States considers Sudan an important ally in the war
against terrorism, and shies away from losing potential intelligence.
Yet many Americans do not even know that a genocide is occurring.
While many Brown students, know about the crisis, the outside world
remains largely oblivious. Much of this is due to our distracted
mainstream media. According to a TVEyes report, in June of 2005,
CBS dedicated 38 segments to the infamous “Runaway Bride,” 614 to
Michael Jackson’s intriguing case, 321 to Tom Cruise’s blossoming
love life and absolutely none to Sudan. Apparently, 400,000 deaths
do not merit even a few seconds of public attention.
The majority of Americans, according to a recent poll sponsored by
the International Crisis Group, believe that more action must be
taken to stop the genocide. However, others argue that African states
seem to always have similar problems, and that we should focus on
domestic isssues and avoid becoming the world’s policeman. While I
agree that Katrina-devastated areas must remain our number — one
priority, we cannot forget the people in Darfur. The fact is, every
human life matters. Every life — American, Russian, or Sudanese —
is equal. That genocide is occurring in a country which holds little
strategic importance to the United States does not mean we should
ignore the killings. As citizens of an increasingly global world, we
need to ensure that all people are treated humanely and with respect,
without regards to where they hail from.
Many people feel overwhelmed when hearing about the genocide. They
criticize the government for not taking action but do not do anything
themselves. Today is the National Day of Action for Darfur. Religious
leaders from across the country are congregating in our nation’s
capitol to voice their concerns regarding the genocide to political
leaders.
We, as college students, need to do the same. We need to call
our congressional offices and voice our opinions. We need to call
President Bush’s office and demand more action be taken. We need
to urge our campus leaders to condemn the genocide and ensure that
our University is divested from all companies complicit with the
conspirators of genocide.
Today, a table will be set up on the Main Green allowing you to do
all this. Sunday, an action and brainstorming meeting to kick off
a semester of activism to stop the genocide will take place. Don’t
stand idly to the side as innocent civilians perish. As hundreds die
every day, we cannot follow our President’s example by throwing up
words without following through. We must act, and we must act now.
Hundreds of thousands of lives are at stake.
(C) 2005 Brown Daily Herald via U-WIRE

MAYOR ACCUSED
Sunday Times (London)
September 25, 2005, Sunday
THE mayor of an Armenian town was arrested after the head of a power
company was shot dead. Armen Kelishyan was said to have killed Ashot
Mkhitaryan after accusing him of inflating his electricity bill.

ARMENIA RECEIVES 10 NEW FIGHTER JETS FROM RUSSIA
Associated Press Worldstream
September 26, 2005 Monday 10:16 AM Eastern Time
Armenia has received 10 new Russian-made fighter jets, the deputy
defense minister said Monday.
The jets are Sukhoi Su-27s, Defense Ministry spokesman Seiran
Shakhsuvarzian said. Officials, including Armenian Deputy Defense
Minister Artur Agabekian, did not provide further details on the deal.
While many other ex-Soviet republics are looking increasingly toward
closer integration with the West, Armenia has remained loyal to
Russia. It hosts a Russian military base, which has become even
more important for Moscow after neighboring Georgia pushed for the
withdrawal of Russian troops.