COUNCIL OF EUROPE NOT TO ASSIST IN HOLDING VOTE AT KARABAKH CONSTITUENCY
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Sept 16 2005
The Council of Europe will not assist in the organization of voting
at the Khankandi district constituency in Nagorny Karabakh, which
allows ethnic Armenian citizens of Azerbaijan to vote in the November
parliament elections.
Azerbaijan’s central election commission (CEC) earlier requested CE
to assist in preparation of voter lists and other technical matters
related to the constituency, head of the CE office in Azerbaijan Mats
Lindberg said.
Lindberg told reporters on Thursday that the organization will not
be able to provide assistance, as the CEC appealed to the CE ‘at
the last moment’ and there is not enough time for this. However,
the Council of Europe office in Baku will try to provide a precise
response to the commission’s appeal, he added.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

COMMITTEE: ARMENIANS ENDURED GENOCIDE
By Lisa Friedman, WASHINGTON BUREAU
The Argus, CA
Sept 16 2005
State Department, House speaker fear resolution could hurt
U.S.-Turkish relations
WASHINGTON – In a momentous victory for California’s sizable Armenian
communities, the House International Relations Committee voted
overwhelmingly Thursday to declare the massacre of Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire a genocide.
In a surprise move, Rep. Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo, declared that after
years of opposing the genocide resolution, he now would support it.
The only Holocaust survivor in Congress and the founder of the
Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Lantos had long cited Washington’s
close relationship with Ankara as a key reason for objecting to
the resolution.
The separate resolutions by Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena, and George
Radanovich, R-Fresno, still must pass several hurdles. The State
Department and House Speaker Dennis Hastert fiercely oppose recognition
of the Armenian genocide, arguing its passage will rupture U.S.-Turkish
relations. Both are expected to try to block a full House vote.
Nevertheless, Armenians on Thursday said by voting 35-11 for Schiff’s
bill and 40-7 for Radanovich’s, the panel sent a strong message that
Congress should not equivocate when it comes to recognizing crimes
against humanity.
“If the United States does not step up and acknowledge this history
and show moral backbone and clarity on these sorts of issues, people
are going to be disappointed in us. We believe in this country because
it does the right thing,” said Armen Carapetian, spokesman for the
Armenian National Committee of America.
The panel voted after more than three hours of tense debate, in
which lawmakers invoked the Holocaust, slavery, Darfur and the fate
of American Indians.
Every Californian on the panel voted in favor of the resolutions.
In 2000, when the issue came before the same committee, Lantos told
his colleagues, “There is a long list of reasons why our NATO ally,
at this point, should not be humiliated.”
On Thursday, Lantos said that while he was “profoundly moved and
anguished by the Armenian people’s horrendous suffering” he remained
unconvinced that the massacres they endured technically constitute
genocide.
Instead, he cited Turkey’s unwillingness to allow U.S. troops to
use its territory to launch an invasion into northern Iraq as well
as the country’s growing closeness with Syria even in the wake of
former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri’s assassination.
“Turkey ignored our interests,” Lantos said. “Our allies must
understand that if they expect the U.S. to support matters of great
interest to them, we expect them to support the things that are
important to the United States.”
Armenians estimate more than 1.5 million died and hundreds of thousands
of others displaced in a planned genocide campaign between 1915 and
1923. Turkey maintains there was no systematic extermination plan,
that only about 300,000 Armenians were killed, and that Armenians
also killed thousands of Turks in the tumultuous last years of the
Ottoman Empire.

REAL REASON BEHIND TERROR DISREGARDED
Zaman, Turkey
Sept 16 2005
[The Muslim World Interview with Gulen]
Question: Can terrorism be considered a way of struggle for freedom?
What is the Islamic alternative to terrorism and struggle?
As I said in an interview with Nuriye Akman for Daily Zaman, today,
at best we can say is that Islam is not known at all. Muslims should
say, “In true Islam, terror does not exist.” No person should kill
another human being. No one can touch an innocent person, even in time
of war. No one can give a fatwa (a legal pronouncement) commending
this matter. No one should be a suicide bomber. No one can rush into
crowds with bombs tied to his or her body. Regardless of the religion
of these crowds, this is not religiously permissible.
Even in the event of war – during which it is difficult to maintain
balances – this is not permitted in Islam. Islam states; “Do not
touch children or people who worship in churches.” This has not
only been said once, but has been repeated over and over throughout
history. What Our Master Prophet Muhammad said, what Abu Bakr said, and
what ‘Umar said is the same as what, at later dates, Salahaddin Ayyûbi,
Alparslan, and Kilicarslan also said. Later on, Sultan Mehmet II,
the Conqueror, also said the same. Thus, the city of Constantinople,
in which a disorderly hullabaloo reigned, became Istanbul. In this
city the Greeks did not harm the Armenians, nor did the Armenians
harm the Greeks. Nor did the Muslims harm any other people. A short
time after the conquest of Constantinople, the people of the city
voluntarily hung a huge portrait of the Conqueror on the wall in the
place of that of the Patriarch. It is amazing that such behavior
was displayed at that time. Then, history relates that the Sultan
summoned the Patriarch and gave him the key to the city. Even today,
Islam is not understood properly. Islam has always respected different
ideas and this must be understood for it to be appreciated properly.
I regret to say that in the countries Muslims live, some religious
leaders and immature Muslims have no other weapon on hand than their
fundamentalist interpretation of Islam; they use this to engage people
in struggles that serve their own purposes. In fact, Islam is a true
faith, and it should be lived truly. On the way to attaining faith
one can never use untrue methods. In Islam, just as a goal must be
legitimate, so must be all the means employed to reach that goal.
>>From this perspective, one cannot achieve Heaven by murdering
another person. A Muslim cannot say, “I will kill a person and then
go to Heaven.” God’s approval cannot be won by killing people. One of
the most important goals for a Muslim is to win the pleasure of God,
another is making the name of Almighty God known to the universe.
Dissatisfied youth has lost its spirituality. Some people take
advantage of such people, giving them a couple of dollars, or turning
them into robots. They have drugged them. This has become a topic on
the agenda these days that can be read about in the popular press.
These young people were abused to an extent that they could be
manipulated. They have been used as murderers on the pretext of some
crazy ideals or goals and they have been made to kill people. Some
evil-minded people have wanted to achieve certain goals by exploiting
these young people. Yes, killing a human is a truly awful thing. The
Qur’an says that killing one person is the same as killing all
people. Ibn ‘Abbas said that a murderer will stay in Hell for
eternity. This is the same punishment that is assigned to deniers of
God. This means that a murderer is subjected to the same punishment
as a disbeliever. If this is a fundamental principle of religion,
then it should be taught in education.
An individual who accepts Islam from the heart will never knowingly
take part in terrorism. The acts of terrorism associated with Islam
may have been perpetrated by some Muslims who had not internalized
the depth of Islam. Terrorism, as the name itself indicates, is a
complicated issue. Analyzing terrorism is not something that is easy
to do. Despite this, because it is so ugly in its nature and because
many Muslims are charged with it, terrorism must be addressed with a
great deal of consideration. Administrators and intelligence agents
have to try to find the originators and the motivating factors of
terrorist activities. This will help develop international strategies
to stop it. Otherwise, as a result of false analysis and some
possible intelligentsia’s services, the issue may be so complicated
that some civilizations, nations and civic organizations will be
always under threat. After September 11th, the issue has developed
in this direction. The fear of terrorism has become paranoia in
our society. At an increasing tempo, general feelings and fears of
society were exploited. Terrorist organizations were used by some as
instruments of terror to reach their goals through terrorist activities
against innocent society. To my understanding, true Muslims will never
involve themselves in such vulgar and cheap activities, even if they
are behind in science and technology. The real factors behind terrorism
are worldly advantages and self-interests. These factors have been
the main reasons behind “the great games” on earth. While the main
reasons are ignored, all fingers pointed to Islam. On the other hand,
there are many conflicting interests in the Islamic regions, as well as
many competing and clashing groups. Problems such as anti-democratic
practices and human rights violations have resulted in the foundation
of various disaffected and disenfranchised groups. Being ignorant
and inexperienced, many of these groups can easily be manipulated and
used by some. Some, manipulating these groups, have worked to reach
their goals step by step. Moreover, there are multi-national covert or
open organizations who have based all of their efforts on destruction
and the creation of fear in society. To extend the borders of their
activities, they agitate the unhappy segments of society by stirring
up trouble and fomenting violence. Even though, through painstaking
and intelligent effort, the superficial reasons for terrorism may be
eliminated, without the above-mentioned considerations, it would be
impossible to end terrorism once and for all. This cursed behavior
will emerge under another name.
–Boundary_(ID_bMlW7Zqk+fP9AG+f6o/QHg)–

HOUSE APPROVES GENOCIDE MEASURES
By Michael Doyle, Mcclatchy News Service
Tri-Valley Herald,
Sept 16 2005
Federal panel goes on record affirming the Ottoman Empire’s killing
of countless Armenians
WASHINGTON – History returned with a vengeance Thursday as a House
committee approved the latest versions of an Armenian genocide
resolution.
With San Joaquin Valley lawmakers and residents looking on
approvingly, the House International Relations Committee approved
the two politically charged Armenian measures by wide margins. It’s
the first time in five years the panel has taken up the resolutions
that incite international controversy.
“I think it’s great,” said Mariposa Republican George Radanovich,
lead author of one of the two Armenian genocide measures. “This is
a good message to send to Turkey.”
But with the Bush administration strongly opposed, and the government
of Turkey lumbering out its big lobbying guns, the Armenian genocide
resolutions still face an uncertain future.
“These resolutions could undermine efforts to rebuild a partnership
between the United States and Turkey in pursuit of America’s broad
national security interests,” Assistant Secretary of State Matthew
Reynolds cautioned in a letter Thursday.
The White House and congressional Republican leaderscan still quash
the Armenian genocide measures in several ways. House Speaker Dennis
Hastert can simply refuse to let them reach the House floor, as he
did in October 2000 to block an earlier Radanovich effort.
Conceivably, Republican leaders could also bring them up under a
procedure that would require a two-thirds vote to pass.
“As it stands now, it’s tough,” Radanovich conceded.
Both resolutions would put the House of Representatives on record
as affirming that the Ottoman Empire engaged in attempted genocide
between 1915 and 1923. Countless Armenians died; Turkish officials now
estimate hundreds of thousands perished in a wider war, while Armenians
contend as many as 1.5 million were killed in a targeted campaign.
Approved by a 40-7 margin, Radanovich’s resolution spells out in 11
pages the evidence demonstrating why the 1915-23 catastrophe deserves
the name genocide. This characterization is the fundamental purpose of
the resolution, which would not have the force of law even if passed
by the House.
The committee also approved by a 35-11 margin a related resolution
authored by Pasadena Democrat Adam Schiff, which also goes on to urge
the Turkish government to acknowledge that a genocide occurred.
“This is a step toward righting an historical injustice,” Schiff said.
Turkish officials and their allies retort that history is ambiguous,
with Turkish Ambassador Faruk Logoglu urging lawmakers in a letter
Thursday to “not let our as-yet unreconciled views of a specific
era dictate our present or our future.” The Turkish government has
proposed that a joint study commission with historians from both
countries examine the evidence.
“I’m afraid the resolution will perpetuate a standoff,” Florida
Democrat Robert Wexler said. “It is time for all parties to place a
greater emphasis on bringing Armenian and Turkish groups together.”
More bluntly, Indiana Republican Dan Burton questioned why Congress was
“rehashing this over and over and over again.” Burton has been one of
the most adamant opponents of the Armenian genocide resolution in its
past iterations, and he spent part of his time Thursday recounting
Armenia’s own alleged depredations during its war with Azerbaijan.
Schiff and Radanovich both represent districts with sizable Armenian
American populations, where politically active constituents have long
pressed the genocide resolutions. Merced Democrat Dennis Cardoza,
a member of the International Relations Committee, also supported the
resolutions that were a deeply personal issue for some in the packed
hearing room.
Part-time Fresno resident Paul Jamushian, for one, described himself as
a “genocide son.” His mother was slashed and left for dead at age 4,
he said, while his father was smuggled to safety dressed as a little
girl. Now retired, and alternating his time between Washington and
Fresno, Jamushian listened avidly to the debate that started midmorning
and carried on into the afternoon.
Sitting not too far way was the physically imposing former chairman
of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, Bob Livingston. Now
a lobbyist, Livingston represents Turkey under a contract originally
pegged at $1.8 million. Scooping up the whole scene were multiple
reporters from Turkish media outlets.
“The reason we have yet to succeed is simple,” Schiff said. “The
government of Turkey has spent millions of dollars and countless
efforts (to oppose the bill.)”

SHARJAH RULER TO VISIT GERMANY, ARMENIA
WAM, Emirates News Agency, UAE
Sept 16 2005
Munich, 16 Sept. 05 (WAM) – H.H. Dr. Sheikh Sultan bin Mohammed Al
Qasimi, Supreme Council Member and Ruler of Sharjah will start tomorrow
an official visit to Germany, to be followed by a visit to Armenia.
During his visit, Sheikh Sultan will inaugurate the Islamic Forum
building in Germany.
During his visit to Armenia, he will be received by President Robert
Kocharian and Andranik Markarian, Armenian Prime Minister.
Sheikh Sultan is accompanied by a high level delegation.

SPEECH OF ALIYEV RE ARMY BUILDING IN AZERBAIJAN
AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Sept 16 2005
This meeting is dealing with the process of army building in
Azerbaijan. Today we are going to exchange views on the work done in
this sphere, tasks we have to solve and steps we have to take. In
all, the process of building disciplined army in Azerbaijan is
progressing rapidly and quite successfully. This process assumed a
system character after national leader of our people Heydar Aliyev
returned to power. Azerbaijan is living in a state of war, and our
lands are under occupation. This requires particular attention, and
as a Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the, I am engaged in these issues
every day as they are the most important to us. Azerbaijan should
restore its territorial integrity. We are exerting our efforts to
resolve the conflict peacefully, through negotiations. As you know,
however, no result has been achieved for many years of negotiations.
In all, finding fair solution to the conflict is possible, and I
am sure will do achieve this. The international law norms are on
Azerbaijan ‘s side, Nagorno-Karabakh is an integral part of Azerbaijan,
and our territorial integrity is recognized and supported by the
global community. The historical justice is on our side also.
It is no secret, the Armenians appeared in Nagorno-Karabakh in 1828,
and I remember a monument to 150th anniversary of the Armenian’s
settling here was erected in 1978. True, the Armenian separatists
destroyed the monument after they occupied the region, but this is
history, and everybody knows that. In other words, Nagorno-Karabakh
is an integral part of Azerbaijan from both legal and historical
standpoints.
Over the last years, Azerbaijan has achieved economic superiority
as well. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, economic situation
was the same in both countries. Azerbaijan, however, has made a great
progress. There was a drastic growth in the state budget in 2004-2005,
and Azerbaijan’s superiority will even increase considering the
country’s promising prospects.
Besides, four UN SC resolutions demanding unconditional release of
the occupied territories from Armenian armed forces is in force.
Recently, the issue has been included once again in the UN GA agenda.
This is our great diplomatic success. Upon our request, the
Organization of Cooperation and Security in Europe immediately
engaged in the issue sent a fact-finding mission to the region. The
mission’s final report confirms illegal settling of thousands
of ethnic Armenians in the occupied territories. This indicates
Armenian utterly ignores the demands of the international community,
and the international law norms. In January this year, the Council
of Europe adopted unambiguous and very fair resolution on the
problem. It is to the effect that Armenian unleashed an aggression
against Azerbaijan, occupied its territories and carried out ethnic
cleansing resulted in over million of Azerbaijanis becoming refugee
and internally displaced. The Organization of Islamic Conference
renders had always supported Azerbaijan’s position. Members of GUAM,
the organization playing an important role in regional politics –
I am sure this role will increase – also unambiguously called for
respect to territorial integrity of countries. In other words, all
the international organizations overtly expressed their positions on
the problem. Of course, we will try the issue remain in the agenda,
but we have to confess the proposals and resources of the international
organizations concerning the problem are being exhausted.
The OSCE Minsk group has recently intensified its activity. We can
see their visits to the region and negotiations, new approaches –
this is a positive fact. I also believe the continuation of the
Prague process is also very positive one. I hope the Prague process
will go on. Both countries, Armenian and Azerbaijan are involved in
this process. As I repeatedly noted, the Prague process implies a
step-by-step solution. However, solution to the problem has not been
found. What should Azerbaijan resort to in this case? Azerbaijan has
been pursuing its peacekeeping policy for years, but the problem is
not settled. That is why the question of reinforcing of our military
potential is quite natural. First Azerbaijan is a country in a state
of war. Our lands are under occupation. This is our #1 problem, and our
#1 task is to strengthen our country’s military potential. On the other
hand, our economic potential is strengthened due to successful economic
reforms being implemented in Azerbaijan. Our budget is rapidly growing
and expected to exceed $3 bln 500 mln next year. This entails increase
in military spending: $175 mln in 2004, $300 mln in 2005 and $600 mln
in 2006, and this is not the limit. As you know, I have set the task:
our military budget should reach the whole budget of Armenia, or even
exceed it. We will do achieve it. It concerns Armenia and several
international organizations. There are many things that troubling us
also, including Russia’s moving its bases from Georgia to Armenia, and
military exercises in Armenia. That is why we will take adequate steps.
I would like to touch on one more issue. The world Armenian lobby,
its patrons and politicians from several countries are acting to prove
that democratic development and protection of human rights allegedly
takes place in Nagorno-Karabakh, not in Azerbaijan.
Firstly, Azerbaijan is a country with intensively developing
democracy. Everybody recognizes that, secondly, the Nagorno-Karabakh
regime is an illegal structure. It is not recognized by anyone. The
hypocrite politicians ignore that it is the area of cultivation and
illegal trafficking of drugs, deployment of terrorist organizations
and violation of human rights. We cannot put up with this erroneous,
dangerous and unjust thesis.
Recently Armenian officials made statements against the realization of
a new project in the region, the construction of a railway to connect
Azerbaijan and Turkey through Georgia. They stated Azerbaijan did
not have a moral right to fund the Kars-Tbilisi0-Baku railway.
Very funny statement. Firstly, it is our own business, secondly,
it is a n international regional project now involving Georgia and
Turkey, and later the Central Asian countries. We will do that,
and no Armenian lobby will be able to prevent us from that.
We do have a moral right to liberate our lands from the occupation
forces, and we will do so. We are pursuing an independent policy. We
rest on the good will of the Azerbaijani people. We will do strengthen
our both economic and military potential, our army and patriotic
spirit within society, and we finally achieve our goal.

CYPRUS AS A FIG LEAF THAT COVERS EU’S OWN NUDITY
Ayca Turan
Journal of Turkish Daily
Sept 16 2005
Last year, I participated in an international youth convention
in a small town in France. Having “Europe and its Boundaries” as
its main theme, this ten-day lasting organization had also invited
guests from non-EU countries such as Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey,
thereby we, 3 Turkish student, had the opportunity to participate in
this organization. The aim of this convention was to create a free
discussion environment where all participants coming from different
countries, different cultures and therefore different political focuses
could express their opinions and listen to the antitheses on the
confirmed EU-related topics. Additional to the discussion sessions, the
games and other social activities helped the organization’s objective
to facilitate intercultural dialogue and reduce cultural prejudices.
Although I departed from France with tears and unforgettable memories,
being a Turkish participant made it be a very though experience for
me. Just by looking at the main theme of the convention, it could have
been guessed that the discussions would be focus on Turkey and his
possible integration to European Union. Even in other discussions,
the subject was inevitably come to Turkey and all participants took
up-right position and their attention rose.
Therefore we needed to be ready for further discussions about
Turkey anytime. After a few days, I got used to find myself in
harsh discussions in which I defended my opinions and Turkey’s
political perspective. Actually the problem was neither Turkey nor
Europe. The real problem was the old-fashioned and invalid Turkey
image in Europe. Therefore EU participants’ questions ended up one
single question: “We read your history, we are following papers and
consequently we know Turks and Turkey this way. But we also want
to listen to you, is this really you?”. The invalid image was so
confirmed that I was confronted with a participant asking me the
funny question “Don’t you Turks ride elephants and wear slippers in
your country?”. This kind of people knowing nothing true about Turkey
and Turkish people can be found everywhere and these people are so
attached to their opinions that it is almost impossible to change
their opinions. Yet, it was also an honor for us to hear “You are
really European” from the same person at the end of the convention,
we felt sorry for this ignoramus. It was said with good intentions,
yet this did not help his bigoted and xenophobic point of view.
Consequently, several feelings and opinions were flying in my head
while traveling to North France by train. I suppose that we, human
beings, could not develop our empathy skills very well. We have a very
small world view and a huge ego; therefore we could not understand
other cultures because of our prejudices.
Actually, the reason that I am sharing this memory with you is an
e-mail coming from The Convention Head whom I was glad to meet and
appreciate very much after all. He wrote “Here, everybody is talking
about Turkey and the coming October, 3rd” reflecting his care about
our country. He was curious about our opinions about the increasing
anti-Turkey arguments in Europe, especially in France. I took this
opportunity to express my opinions, my feelings and my expectations
before the coming historical day.
I could not witness the major part of the historical dialogue between
Turkey and European Union. Yet, as far as I could observe, it will not
be possible for Turkey to be well in EU integration for the following
years. I suppose that we have many years to live and many things to
do before the integration. It is inevitable to have a new case at the
time that we say “Ok. We are done!” However, the interesting thing
is the fact that I do not get depressed and disappointed at these
negative events just as I do not get excited and energized at the
happy news coming from EU.
Few days left before October 3rd, new topics arose. Our new topic
is EU-Turkey-Cyprus triangle. Actually, the problem is not Cyprus,
if our new topic were not Cyprus, it would be something else. What
really matters is the fact that EU needed to give something before
October, 3rd to be presented as the reason for the possible negative
outcome. It is nothing but the fig leaf that covers EU’s own nudity.
Essentially, there are two important questions needed to be answered
by EU before their temporizing policy of defining EU-Turkey relations
on a Cyprus platform: First of all “What kind of Europe that we are
willing to have?” Europe could not develop a serious decree on this
question. Second question to be answered is “Does Turkey belong to
Europe, or not? What are the boundaries of Europe?” The answer of
one question will facilitate finding the answer to the other question.
Although Luxembourg Summit in 1997 and EU’s giving candidate status to
Turkey in Helsinki Summit are named as a reply to the first question,
the increasing anti-Turkey campaigns enforced by some political
sectors in the EU-founder countries indicate the fact that past
decisions and past promises were not accepted by the politicians.
When we look at the European countries, anti-Turkey campaigns executed
by populist leaders, Merkel and Sarkozy, in Germany and France
draw attention. Merkel is as usual. We all know her vision about
EU-Turkey relations from the beginning. She is one of the politicians
that keeps on defending the exceptional partnership opinion about
“neither with nor without” Turkey. She just increased her frequency
of expressing this opinion before the September, 18 elections. We
appreciate her since she is a kind of leader that tells what she
really thinks about this case. On the other hand, the campaigns
in France executed by Chirac and vision lacking leaders such as
Villepin and Sarkozy are really disturbing. Rather, France’s recent
attitude is totally duplicity. Especially Chirac’s “We can not start
October, 3rd process until all EU countries are recognized by Turkey”
declaration is a very brave step for France. Yet when we look closer,
Cyprus is not the primal matter for France. It is just Turkey used by
the leaders in order to serve for their domestic policies that will
empower their political status just before the presidential elections.
I also want to add my opinions about “Does Turkey belong to Europe?”
discussions. Although Europe puts Cyprus at the center of its
relations with Turkey, EU should present a precise answer to this
question at first. Everything would be simpler for both Turkey
and Europe. Recently, “Turkey and Turks do not belong to Europe”
expressions are widening all around Europe. The reference point
of these expressions is settled down on historical, religious – we
cannot forget the claim: “Is EU a Christian Club?” – and cultural
platforms. There are also old fashioned claims such as Turkey
geographically does not belong to Europe. According to my point of
view, EU’s boundaries should artificially be taken. Claims like “Turkey
is an Asian country when we look at her geographical position.” are
not noteworthy anymore, they are nothing but excuses.
What’s more, EU is not a religious union that we can name as a
Christian Club. If we accept this argument, we shall also explain
the situation of Muslims’ living mostly at the Balkans. EU’s applying
quote to non-Christian countries conflicts with her values defended
since EU’s foundation. It is known that human dignity and freedom of
worship lie on the basis of Islam; therefore there is not any conflict
between EU’s basic values and Turkey’s religious identity.
At this point, EU should rethink about its secularism principle and
reconsider the fact that Turkey is a secular country. On the other
hand, global values such as the excellence of law and state of law,
respect to human dignity, democracy, freedoms and justice are put under
strict legal protection in Turkey; therefore democracy is empowered
in Turkey. These improvements indicate that Turkey is becoming closer
to Europe, actually to what Europe symbolizes. The problem of defining
Europe’s boundaries is just an identity problem of Europe, not Turkey.
It is totally inaccurate to compare Turkey’s integration process
with Bulgaria, Croatia or Romania. Turkey, with her 80-million
population, economic and strategic position, domestic dynamics and
cultural values, has a unique status. Furthermore, it has Cyprus at
one hand and political problems with Kurdish population and Armenian
issue at the second one. Cyprus affairs can cause unexpected outcomes
for Turkey, but it should not be forgotten that Turkey has executed
major political and legal reforms in the recent years. Especially
legal arrangements according to human dignity area facilitated the
excellence of law and state of law and supported the empowerment
of democracy in Turkey. These steps strengthen Turkey’s political
power on the global issues in her region. From this point of view,
Turkey’s integration to EU is not a donation or a favor; it is a
win-win kind of a partnership. Putting what Turkey will gain from
this membership away, Europe will have a more powerful position on
the global political arena.
What is to be done next is to constructively follow the negotiation
process that is said to begin at October, 3rd. Both parties keep
many advantages coming from this partnership in mind. One important
thing that is also needed to be considered in this article is the
fact that October, 3rd is not an end, it is just a beginning. For
Turkey and for Europe as well. We will have more though days in
front of us and there will be more opposing peoples, groups and
politicians who will try to avoid us from realizing our political
objectives. Altering these opponents into minorities and diminishing
anti-Islamic and Eurocentric insights will only be provided by sincere
and intensive endeavors. That’s why, benefiting from this process
is quite important. My last word to the hopeless, we have not been
confronted with claims like “Turkey is anthropologically unsuitable
for Turkey”, keep your hope.
AYCA TURAN is a researcher at ISRO, Center for European Union, Ankara
TURKEY September, 15 2005

CONSTANTINE ZATULIN CASTS DOUBTS ON AZERBAIJAN’S TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
DeFacto, Armenia
Sept 16 2005
In the interview with Echo newspaper (Baku) the CIS Institute Director,
RF State Duma deputy, a member of State Duma Committee for CIS and
Relations with Compatriots Constantine Zatulin stated he did not
understand why Azerbaijan’s borders could not be changed.
According to Echo, he was interviewed in connection with the conference
“Parallel CIS: Abkhazia, Pridnestrovie, South Ossetia and Nagorno
Karabakh as the realities of the post – Soviet territory”.
In Zatulin’s words, the principal goal of the conference is to acquaint
the society with life in the states, learn politologists’, experts’,
politicians’ opinion.
RF State Duma deputy does not believe the measure’s organization will
aggravate Russia’s relations with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and harm
the Karabakh settlement process. “Vice versa, I think circulation of
the objective information on what is going on in the conflict zone
and not the desire to put out false reports or follow propaganda
war’s logic denying reality will bring us closer to a decision. If
we follow certain propaganda denying not only the right to self –
determination as such, but self – determination’s reality in the
conflict zone, in spite of the fact whether some people liked it or
not, we’ll fail to find a solution”, said C. Zatulin.
“I dislike the fact that during hundreds of years the territory
that is called post – Soviet territory now was single whole. At the
end of 1990s the Soviet Union disintegrated, as a result of which a
number of states has become independent. If I had been wrong I would
have stated for 15 years that the states are separatists. However,
we do not say it…The Soviet Union disintegrated, so why should we
believe the boundaries that used to be defined by someone, for example
those providing Nagorno Karabakh within Azerbaijan or Abkhazia within
Georgia, is something eternal, which is not subject to corrections?
And yet, we do not render political decisions at the conference. Even
if we had done it I believe objective consideration of the issue,
the attempt to present another point of view is very important. As
for Azerbaijan’s nervous reaction on the conference’s conduct I am
sorry the reaction was like that”, said the CIS Institute Director.

KOLEROV: RUSSIA ACTS ON THE BASIS OF THE LAW ON COMPATRIOTS
DeFacto, Armenia
Sept 16 2005
The choice of each unrecognized state is to appeal to Russia or
minimize its participation in the conflict settlement. Chief of the RF
Presidential Department for Inter-Regional and Cultural Relations with
Foreign Countries Modest Kolerov stated it speaking at the conference
“Parallel CIS. Abkhazia, Pridnestrovie, the South Caucasus and Nagorno
Karabakh as realities of the post – Soviet territory”.
In his words, “40 000 of Russian citizens in the South Ossetia, 150
000 in Abkhazia is the imperative we cannot ignore”. “Both sides of the
conflict are compatriots for us, we should take it into consideration
and guarantee their humanitarian rights”, noted he.
According to Modest Kolerov, modern conception of human rights submits
such claims, including the right to free choice of citizenship, free
access to communications, the right to information, the right to free
choice of educational and cultural activity. “These are fundamental
rights”, stated Kolerov.

‘APPROVAL OF ARMENIAN BILL WILL HARM OUR INTERESTS’
By Anadolu News Agency
Zaman, Turkey
Sept 16 2005
zaman.com
US State Department Assistant Secretary for legislation affairs, Matt
Reynolds, wrote a letter to Henry Hyde, US House of Representatives
International Relations Committee head, indicating that the US
administration is against the approval of Armenian bills seeking for
recognition of the so-called Armenian genocide.
The House discussed two Armenian bills earlier today.
Despite the letter of objection prepared by the US administration
and sent to Hyde, the bill has been approved by the House.
Reynolds’s letter to Hyde said US President George W. Bush acknowledged
in his April 24 statement the “tragic events that happened in Eastern
Anatolia when the Ottoman Empire was about to end,” which Armenians
are inclined to see as the 90th anniversary of the so-called genocide.
The letter also indicated the committee apparently determined to
discuss these bills, but the US administration would resist the
approval of these two bills.
If these bills are put on the agenda of the House General Assembly
for discussion, that will harm Turkish and American relations and
stop Ankara and Yerevan relations from improvement.