Agence France Presse — Spanish
March 20, 2005 Sunday 12:14 PM GMT

Crece tensión entre Azerbaiyán y Armenia en torno a Nagorny Karabaj

BAKU Mar 20

La tensión ha vuelto entre Azerbaiyán y Armenia en torno al enclave
de Nagorny Karabaj, con violaciones del alto al fuego que causaron ya
varias víctimas, por lo que algunos expertos temen el reinicio de la
guerra.

“En once años de alto el fuego la tensión ha alcanzado el nivel
actual dos o tres veces y cada vez la situación hubiera podido
terminar en guerra”, afirmó Azad Isazade, experto militar y ex alto
responsable azerbaiyano durante la guerra de Karabaj (1988-1994).

Desde el acuerdo de alto el fuego de 1994, Armenia controla Nagorny
Karabaj –enclave donde la población es mayoritariamente armenia en
territorio azerbaiyano– y otras siete regiones cercanas, o sea, 14%
del territorio de Azerbaiyán tal y como es reconocido por la
comunidad internacional.

Y si el conflicto terminó, el proceso de paz no ha avanzado.

En las últimas semanas por lo menos cuatro soldados azerbaiyanos
murieron y otros tres resultaron heridos en enfrentamientos con
tropas armenias.

La Organización para la Liberación de Karabaj (OLK) llamó la semana
pasada a los azerbaiyanos a tomar las armas.

Azerbaiyán y Armenia anularon las negociaciones que debían llevarse a
cabo en marzo en Praga, mientras que el presidente azerbaiyano, Ilham
Aliev, amenazó con resolver el conflicto “por otros medios” si las
negociaciones fracasaran.

El conflicto de Nagorny Karabaj a causado más de 35.000 víctimas y
cerca de un millón de refugiados, pero los analistas dicen que una
nueva guerra sería más destructora, pues ambos ejércitos están mucho
mejor equipados ahora que en tiempos de la caída de la URSS.

–Boundary_(ID_YGPGdVBZhRmTLECNrmQXcg)–

Thwarting Base Ambitions
By Pavel Felgenhauer

Moscow Times
Tuesday, March 22, 2005. Issue 3129. Page 11.

In the early 1990s, as the Soviet Union collapsed, the remnant of
the Soviet Army in the Transcaucasus region was harassed and its
weapons stolen or expropriated. The Defense Ministry in Moscow was
mostly preoccupied with removing essential equipment like tactical
nuclear warheads and secret satellite communication stations before
they were taken over by the locals.

Everything changed in the mid-1990s as a string of ethnic wars,
accompanied by ethnic cleansing, crippled the three Transcaucasus
republics of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Armenia defeated the
Azeris in Nagorny Karabakh but was then blockaded by Turkey. Weak
and defeated Azerbaijan was seeking Russian help in an acute conflict
with Iran over drilling rights in the oil-rich Caspian Sea. By 1995,
the Russian military dominated most of the Transcaucasus. There were
some 15,000 Russian soldiers on Georgian territory, outnumbering
the ragtag local military that was devastated by civil wars and
the defeat in Abkhazia. Russian border guards fully controlled the
Turkish border. By 1995, the Georgian and Armenian governments signed
agreements to allow Russia to keep military bases on their territory
for as many as 25 more years.

While recruiting Armenia as an ally, Russia also extended substantial
influence into Azerbaijan. Both rival nations were seeking favor in
Moscow and the Azeri government authorized the Russian military to
continue to operate a large early warning radar in Gabala, west of
Baku. This radar allows the Defense Ministry to monitor things like
U.S. military air activity over Iraq and Iranian ballistic missile
tests.

The Georgians hoped that in exchange for military bases, Moscow would
press separatists in South Ossetia and Abkhazia to reach a settlement
with the central government in Tbilisi. Moscow did attempt to mediate
but halfheartedly and with zero effect. During the last decade,
the Kremlin has not proposed a single workable solution to any of
the long-lasting conflicts in the region.

The restoration of Russia’s influence in the region was facilitated by
ethnic wars in which Moscow intermittently aided both sides, sending
arms and military specialists first to help Armenia, then the Azeris
and then back again. The same pattern was repeated in Georgia, and
Russian aid always equaled battlefield success for the favored side.

Many in Moscow believed that keeping conflicts in the Transcaucasus
frozen but unresolved would preserve Russia’s newly gained
influence. The Georgian parliament did not ratify the agreement to keep
Russian military bases because there was no progress in resolving the
Abkhazia problem or, most important for the Georgians, in negotiating
the return of refugees to Abkhazia. Now this treaty has been abandoned,
and this month the Georgian parliament demanded the immediate removal
of the bases, threatening sanctions and a moratorium on visas to
Russian officers sent to serve in Georgia.

As the military got mired down in Chechnya and all battle-ready
resources were sent to the North Caucasus, its presence in the
Transcaucasus region dwindled. Today there are only around 4,000
soldiers left at Russian bases in Georgia, and they are not fully
battle-ready.

The $100 a month earned by regular contract solders was a lot of
money in the 1990s. Armenians, Georgians and Abkhazians paid bribes to
get papers to prove they had the right to Russian citizenship, which
allowed them to serve under the Russian flag. At the Russian base in
Batumi, Georgia, on the Turkish border, most of the rank and file are
local Georgians. Armenians staff another base on Georgian territory
in Akhalkalaki, as the Meskheti Turks that once lived in the region
were expelled by Josef Stalin in the 1940s and replaced by Armenian
settlers. If the Georgians decide to blockade the Russian bases, the
garrisons staffed with locals would likely offer only token resistance.

Instead of forming alliances with the Transcaucasus nations based
on long-term interests and aspirations, the Kremlin has kept various
factions and ethnic groups at each other’s throats. Since 2002, under
orders from the Kremlin, Russian passports have been freely distributed
in South Ossetia and Abkhazia in an obvious prelude to annexation.

The Georgians could either agree to become a Russian dependency along
with South Ossetia and Abkhazia, or lose these areas entirely. However,
when push came to shove over military bases, it became apparent that
President Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin has no spare capacity to support
its ambitions with force. And Soviet-style policies do not work
without Soviet might.

Pavel Felgenhauer is an independent defense analyst based in Moscow.

Tensions mount over disputed Karabakh regionby Simon Ostrovsky

Relief Web

Source: Agence France-Presse (AFP)

Date: 20 Mar 2005

BAKU, March 20 (AFP) – Long-simmering tensions over the disputed
enclave of Karabakh in the volatile Caucasus have flared recently,
sparking fears that the escalation of hostilities along a ceasefire
line between Armenian and Azeri forces could lead to a new war.

“In the eleven years since the ceasefire was signed there have only
been two or three occasions when tensions were at this level, and each
time the situation could have deteriorated into war,” Azad Isazade,
a prominent military analyst in Azerbaijan and a former information
official in the 1988-1994 war for Karabakh told AFP.

Armenia has controlled Karabakh and seven surrounding regions which
make up 14 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory
since the two former Soviet republics ended large-scale hostilities
with a ceasefire in 1994.

But an escalation of ceasefire breaches and a mounting death toll
reported in recent weeks by the Azeri media have given observers
pause and caused concern in Washington, as efforts to resolve the
territorial dispute diplomatically have disintegrated.

In the past month alone there have been reports of numerous exchanges
of fire between Azeri and Armenian forces resulting in the deaths of
at least four Azeris and the capture of another three. During 2004,
six Azeri soldiers were killed.

Officials in Armenian-controlled Karabakh have also confirmed the
casualties, but did not provide figures.

“This shows that the conflict is not frozen and it is necessary to
work to resolve it,” the United States’ ambassador to Azerbaijan Reno
Harnish was quoted by Azeri media as saying last week amidst calls
by the radical Karabakh Liberation Organization (KLO) in Azerbaijan
to prepare for war.

“We can only free our lands using force, we can only get results by
following the principles of force against force, blood for blood and
death to the enemy,” the KLO said in a statement.

Meanwhile the foreign ministers of the two Caucasus countries have
cancelled talks that were scheduled for this month in Prague, and
Azerbaijan’s president Ilham Aliyev said there could be no compromises
over Karabakh and last week threatened to resolve the issue “by other
means” if negotiations fail.

Raising the stakes is a four-billion-dollar oil pipeline being built by
Anglo-American BP that will represent one of the West’s main non-OPEC
sources of oil when completed later this year, and portions of which
lie dangerously close to the ceasefire line.

War over Nagorno-Karabakh ended with some 35,000 casualties and
displaced one million people. Analysts warn that today, Armenian and
Azeri armies could inflict significantly more damage onto each other,
compared with the poorly-equipped rag-tag battalions that formed
after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

According to Isazade, today’s escalation is the result of a
geopolitical tug-of-war for dominance in the Caucasus between the
United States, backing Azerbaijan and Georgia, and Russia, which
backs Armenia.

“There have been rumors that America wants to use Azerbaijan as a
platform to attack Iran, in exchange Azerbaijan expects help getting
Karabakh back. Armenia understands this so they have been shooting
as if to say ‘we’re still here,’ probably goaded on by Russia,”
Isazade said.

But separatist officials in the self-proclaimed Nagorno Karabakh
Republic blamed the escalation on Azeri forces which they said have
been making dangerous attempts to capture new positions closer to
Armenian lines.

They are purposefully “moving their firing positions closer to the
Nagorno Karabakh defense army’s forward lines, thereby thinning the
so-called ‘no man’s land,’ which has resulted in the escalation of
tensions along the front line,” the republic’s self-styled deputy
foreign minister Masis Mailyan told AFP.

An analyst in Yerevan said the frequent shootouts were Azerbaijan’s
way of destabilizing the situation to show that negotiations headed
by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
were failing so that discussions could be moved to a new arena such
as the United Nations.

“They want to show that the OSCE can’t control the situation … In
the UN they hope to find the support of other Muslim nations,” said
the Stepan Safaryan, an analyst with the Armenian Center for Strategic
and National Research.

mkh-son/yad/jmy AFP 201320 GMT 03 05

Copyright (c) 2005 Agence France-Presse Received by NewsEdge Insight:
03/20/2005 08:22:58

Bahrain calls for global IT links
By SOMAN BABY

Gulf Daily News
Vol XXVIII NO. 2 Tuesday 22 March 2005

MANAMA

BAHRAIN yesterday urged policy-makers thoughout Asia to forge closer
links with the global information technology industry. The call
came from Transportation Minister Shaikh Ali bin Khalifa Al Khalifa,
at the opening of the third Asia IT Ministers’ Summit.

Delegations from more than 35 countries, including 20 ministers, are
attending the two-day event at the Bahrain International Exhibition
Centre. The landmark summit is a continuation of the dialogue between
Asian ministers on how to develop the IT infrastructure in their
respective countries and how to benefit from the latest developments
of the global information and communication technology.

The dialogue started at the first summit, which was held in 2003 in
Seoul, Korea and continued in January, 2004 in Hyderabad, India.

“At the last summit in Hyderabad, Bahrain was awarded the privilege
to hold the third summit and this is an excellent opportunity for
the Arab world to align their own IT development strategies with
the fast-growing Asian economies, which share many similarities in
economic development and infrastructure,” said Shaikh Ali.

The Bahrain summit will review the progress made since Hyderabad and
evaluate new IT solutions and technologies.

“The summit is of strategic importance not only for the participating
countries but also for the continued prosperity of humankind,” said
Shaikh Ali.

“Therefore, the global IT industry has also been invited to take
a serious look at this event, because the interaction between
the policy-makers from Asia and the top leaders from the global IT
industry will provide first-hand information on future market trends
and industry requirements.”

Issues under discussion include the language barrier, the Internet
culture shock, security and privacy protection in Asia and the Middle
East, the Asian and Middle East dilemma and future telecommunication
infrastructure.

“Bahrain is the ideal platform for this event in the Middle East
because of its advanced business infrastructure, the high level
of IT penetration in business, academia and personal use and
because of Bahrain’s pioneering efforts in the liberalisation of
the telecommunications markets, the advances in e-government and
its leading role as a banking and financial centre in the region,”
said Shaikh Ali.

“The summit will also provide a unique opportunity for the IT and
telecommunication industry leaders to meet policymakers from the
world’s largest and fastest growing markets.”

Kuwait’s Transportation, Planning and Adminstrational Development
Minister Shaikh Ahmed bin Abdulla Al Ahmed Al Sabah gave the keynote
address.

International Telecommuni-cations Union (ITU) regional representative
to the Arab states Ebrahim Al Haddad, Egypt’s Telecommunications and
IT Minister Dr Tareq Kamal, Tunisian Telecom-munication Technology
Minister Dr Mumtasser Ouaili and Pakistani Minister for IT and
Telecommunication, Awais Ahmed Khan Leghari also spoke at the opening
session.

Countries represented at the summit are: Afghanistan, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran,
South Korea, Kuwait, People’s Democratic Republic of Laos, Malaysia,
Myanmar, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Qatar, Russia,
Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey,
UAE, Vietnam and Yemen.

An industry forum will be held today, in which leaders from the
industry will provide an insight into the trends and advances in the
information age.

The summit will conclude this evening with a Bahrain Declaration.

The Sweet Science
Monday Mar 21, 2005

It matters little who sits in the corner, as it will be up to the two
warriors in the middle of the ring who determine who takes this one.

Boxing South Africa: Darchinyan – Sikali Set for Clash Down Under

by Deon Potgieter

South Africa and Australia have been archrivals for many years
and whenever these two countries go up against each other in any
sport there is added interest in what will transpire. Even though
IBF flyweight world champion Vic Darchinyan is of Armenian decent,
he now fights out of Australia, and when he climbs into the ring to
defend his title on March 27 against South Africa’s Mzukisi Sikali,
there’s going to be fireworks.

Sikali, the current IBO flyweight and former WBU junior fly and
super flyweight world champion, is a seasoned professional who has
come through the school of hard knocks to get where he is today. His
scarred face and gritty looks reflect that he is by no means a man
to take lightly – and it’s unlikely that the champion would do so.

Darchinyan (22 wins with 17 KOs), who is trained by hall of famer
Jeff Fenech, stopped the highly rated Irene Pacheco in 11 rounds to
claim the crown on December 16 and will be looking to celebrate his
newfound stardom in front of his “home-crowd” in Home Bush, New South
Wales Australia.

Fenech is no stranger to South Africa and has brought a number of
his charges to the southern most tip of the continent in hopes of
furthering their careers. Many of them have been against boxers trained
by Harold Volbrecht, who also trains Sikali. Fenech has not had much
success against Volbrecht’s charges, but that could all change with
the Darchinyan-Sikali encounter.

Few local pundits give Sikali a chance against the champion. Although
Sikali has always been respected, he is known to drift from the
garden path on occasion and is not always totally committed to his
fistic career. Sikali does, however, have an abundance of talent and
possesses a huge arsenal, boasting almost every shot in the book. If
he’s fired up and remains focused he has the ability to upset anyone
in the division.

To many people’s surprise, Volbrecht, who battled to inspire Corrie
Sanders in his clash with Vitali Klitschko, has had a tremendous
influence on Sikali thus far, and this partnership looks to be one
of those exceptional ones where trainer and boxer flourish in each
other’s company. Whether the 33-year-old Sikali (29 wins, 5 losses,
2 draws with 17 KOs), who is looking sharp in training, still has
the legs to claim a fourth world title remains to be seen. The fact
that he will be facing another southpaw in his quest will also add
an interesting dimension to the fight.

Nobody likes fighting southpaws, especially other southpaws. Finding
the perfect trainer to coach a southpaw to fight a southpaw, one
need look no further than Volbrecht. He is a southpaw who twice
challenged for the WBA welterweight world title and holds a national
record for defending his South African welterweight title a total of
19 times. With more opportunities at the right times in his career
there is no doubt he would have claimed a world title. Amongst his
past charges of the have been former two-time junior lightweight world
champion, Brian Mitchell, former two-time heavyweight world champion
Corrie Sanders, former welterweight world champion Jan Bergman,
and former two-time cruiserweight world champion Sebastian Rothman,
to name a few.

Fenech also has a well documented pedigree, but in the end it matters
little who sits in the corner, as it will be up to the two warriors in
the middle of the ring who determine who takes this one. Both have 17
KOs to date and methinks this one will end with one of them having 18.

Las Vegas Business Press, NV
Monday, March 21, 2005

Eastern European contractors visit local company

The SABIT delegation takes a break from its meeting at American Asphalt and
Grading Company.
BY IAN MYLCHREEST

BUSINESS PRESS

Executives at American Asphalt and Grading Company (AAG) found
themselves last week leading a seminar for a group of road construction
executives from the former Soviet Union. The group from Armenia,
Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine were participating in the U.S. Department
of Commerce’s Special American Business Internship Training (SABIT)
program.

The Russian-speaking executives were in town for the CONEXPO trade
show but took a morning to visit the offices of AAG where they were
given some insights into the road construction business in Clark
County. The SABIT tour was part of a month of discussions with
construction executives and public officials across the country.

AAG’s program for the visiting Europeans included meetings with
senior executives of all divisions including construction and
equipment. Jim Atkins, AAG’s vice president of the public works and
commercial divisions, led the discussions describing typical patterns
of road construction and funding from the various government bodies
for different types of roads. He also described for the Europeans
unfamiliar with Nevada’s native soils, the kind of chemical and other
treatment to lay a road bed as well as the road bed of crushed rock
compacted to about 90 to 95 percent density. The participants grasped
that, although they were unfamiliar with the configuraton in Atkins’
whiteboard illustration.

Also on the agenda were the various flood control mechanisms that
are part of the construction process. Those two were a surprise for
engineers more familiar with soils that absorb rainfall.

Perhaps most perplexing for the visitors was the funding mechanisms
for different kinds of roads. Gasoline taxes paid for construction,
explained Atkins, but some of the SABIT guests seemed perplexed
by distinction between the national highway system of the federal
government and state and county programs to build main roads.

Even more difficult was the concept of suburban roads that are built
by developers to city or county specifications, but then turned over
or “dedicated” to the local authorities after they are built. Atkins
explained that developers typically grade and prepare a site and
install infrastructure, including roads, as part of the development
costs.

After some questions and more discussion and the occasionally quizzical
look as the translators struggled to keep up with the lively back
and forth, the concept was grasped. Eventually, one attendee asked
if the roads were utlimately paid for by the buyers of houses and
other buildings in new developments.

“Absolutely,” Atkins replied to the translator who relayed the message
to the visitors. “Now you understand capitalism!”

The group seemed gratified as Atkins explained to them that AAG had
about 50 percent marketshare of grading in the valley and 30 percent
marketshare for paving asphalt.

SABIT is a joint initiative of the U.S. Department of Commerce and
the private sector to promote market access through strong commercial
partnerships. Its training programs, according to the DOC Web site,
directly support Eurasian economic and civil society development by
encouraging market-based reforms, while generating valuable export
and investment opportunities for U.S. industry.

“Expanding commercial trade ties is critical to the economic well-being
of the United States as well as to the continued growth of the
countries of Eurasia,” says Tracy Rollins, director of SABIT. “The more
we expand trade, the more we foster democratic values and stability
abroad, all of which are vital to our security.”

AAG was found, says Erin Schumacher, an international trade specialist
and program recruiter at the DOC, through Internet research. “We
have to fill the time with company and site visits,” she adds. Atkins
says he was called by the DOC and was happy to oblige in showing the
Europeans an American contractor at work.

Atkins says his company has no ambitions. “No, we really don’t see
it opening up business opportunities for us. We’ve got all the work
we can do here.”

The delegation operated with two translators, who took turns in
explaining the Americans words in Russian. Schumacher says any Eastern
European over 30 is fluent in Russian because they were forced to learn
it under the Soviet regime. “We had to choose one language,” she says,
“and they all knew that.” The delegates wore wireless transmitters
and earphones to better understand their translators.

The SABIT delegation also visited Washington, DC, Boston and
Phoenix. They also undertook private visits to construction sites to
see American contracting in action.

Since 1990, over 1,000 organizations have hosted over 3,300 trainees
through SABIT, which has been credited with facilitating $300 million
in export revenues.

[email protected] | 702-871-6780 x319

Congressional Record: March 17, 2005
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

COMMENDING HARRY GILMORE

(Mr. RADANOVICH asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Harry Gilmore,
the first American Ambassador to Armenia who is the latest U.S.
official to publicly acknowledge the Armenian genocide and call for
international recognition.
In an interview with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the retired
diplomat recently said, “There is no doubt that the Armenian events
were genocide.”
Gilmore’s comments followed those of the current U.S. Ambassador to
Armenia, John Evans, who recently evoked the Armenian Genocide during
his first stateside visit to Armenian communities across the country.
During a series of public exchanges with Armenians late last month,
Evans stated, “The Armenian genocide was the first genocide of the
twentieth century.”
As a proud member of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues and
an ardent supporter of Fresno’s Armenian American community, I thank
the Ambassadors for their statements and pledge to continue my efforts
for a full United States affirmation of the Armenian genocide.

____________________

Congressional Record: March 17, 2005
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

RECOGNIZING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

______

HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN

of rhode island

in the house of representatives

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend U.S. Ambassador to
Armenia John Evans for properly labeling the atrocities committed by
the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as genocide and to urge the
President to follow his example and accurately characterize this crime
against humanity in his commemorative statement next month.
Ambassador Evans recently completed his first U.S. visit to major
Armenian-American communities to share his initial impressions of
Armenia and our programs there. During his public exchanges with
Armenian-American communities throughout the United States late last
month, Ambassador Evans declared that “the Armenian Genocide was the
first genocide of the twentieth century.”
By employing this term, the Ambassador is building on previous
statements by Presidents Reagan and Bush, as well as the repeated
declarations of numerous world-renowned scholars. In effect, Evans has
done nothing more than succinctly name the conclusions enunciated by
those before him.
In 1981, President Reagan issued a presidential proclamation that
said in part: “like the genocide of the Armenians before it, and the
genocide of the Cambodians which followed it–and like too many other
persecutions of too many other people–the lessons of the Holocaust
must never be forgotten . . .” President Bush, himself, has invoked
the textbook definition of genocide in his preceding April 24th
statements by using the expressions “annihilation” and “forced exile
and murder” to characterize this example of man’s inhumanity to man.
Furthermore, Evans’ remarks correspond with the signed statement in
2000 by 126 Genocide and Holocaust scholars affirming that the World
War I Armenian Genocide is an incontestable historical fact and
accordingly urging the governments of Western democracies to likewise
recognize it as such. The petitioners, among whom is Nobel Laureate for
Peace Elie Wiesel, also asked the Western Democracies to urge the
Government and Parliament of Turkey to finally come to terms with a
dark chapter of Ottoman-Turkish history and to recognize the Armenian
Genocide.
The Ambassador’s declarations also conform to the summary conclusions
of the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) when it
facilitated an independent legal study on the applicability of the 1948
Genocide Convention to events that occurred during the early twentieth
century. The ICTJ report stated that “the Events, viewed collectively,
can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime of
genocide as defined in the Convention, and legal scholars as well as
historians, politicians, journalists and other people would be
justified in continuing to so describe them.”
The Armenian people’s ability to survive in the face of the
repression carried out against them stands as a monument to their
endurance and will to live. Therefore, it is critically important that
the United States speak with one voice in condemning the horrors
committed against the Armenians. Only by working to preserve the truth
about the Armenian Genocide can we hope to spare future generations
from the horrors of the past.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I join the Armenian Caucus Co-Chairs,
Representatives Frank Pallone and Joe Knollenberg, in applauding the
statements of Ambassador Evans and others, and in urging the President
to reaffirm the U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide.

____________________

Congressional Record: March 17, 2005
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

AFFIRMING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

HON. MICHAEL BILIRAKIS

of florida

in the house of representatives

Thursday, March 17, 2005

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John
Evans, in public forums with the Armenian community, recently
characterized what President George W. Bush has described as an
“appalling tragedy of the 20th century, the massacre of as many as 1.5
million Armenians through forced exile and murder at the end of the
Ottoman Empire,” as Genocide.
I rise today to join with Ambassador Evans and other public officials
who have affirmed the truth and recognize that reconciling with the
past is an important first step in creating a better future.
Recognition of the Armenian Genocide is widely acknowledged. One
hundred and twenty-six Holocaust scholars publicly affirmed the
incontestable fact of the Armenian Genocide during the 30th Anniversary
of the Scholars’ Conference on the Holocaust and the Churches. And in
1981, former President Ronald Reagan stated: “Like the genocide of the
Armenians before it, and the genocide of the Cambodians which followed
it–and like too many other such persecutions of too many other
peoples–the lessons of the Holocaust must never be forgotten.”
In addition, a recent study released by the International Center for
Transitional Justice (ICTJ) on the use of the term Armenian Genocide
and the applicability of the 1948 Genocide Convention to events which
occurred during the early twentieth century in Ottoman Turkey, found
that “the Events, viewed collectively, can thus be said to include all
of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention,
and legal scholars as well as historians, politicians, journalists and
other people would be justified in continuing to so describe them.”
As we approach the 90th commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, we
must ensure that we do not forget the lessons of the past. Archbishop
Desmond Tutu, in the Preface to the Encyclopedia of Genocide, published
in 1999 by the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem,
writes: “It is sadly true what a cynic has said, that we learn from
the history that we do not learn from history. And yet it is possible
that if the world had been conscious of the genocide that was committed
by the Ottoman Turks against the Armenians, the first genocide of the
twentieth century, then perhaps humanity might have been more alert to
the warning signs that were being given before Hitler’s madness was
unleashed on an unbelieving world.”
Mr. Speaker, let us never forget and let us affirm the truth.

____________________

Congressional Record: March 17, 2005
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

ANTHONY BARSAMIAN SPEAKS ELOQUENTLY ABOUT THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

HON. BARNEY FRANK

of massachusetts

in the house of representatives

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, last month, Anthony
Barsamian, Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Armenian Assembly
of America, made an eloquent speech at the “International Refuge,
Relief and Recognition Tribute” hosted by the Armenian-American
community in California. Mr. Barsamian eloquently stressed the
importance to all of us of remembering that “the history of genocide
must remain inviolable and periodically affirmed regardless of
political discomfort or cost so that we may learn its lessons.”
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a grave error that this Congress has not
been allowed to vote on a resolution affirming this important point
with regard to the terrible history of the genocide perpetrated against
the Armenians. We cannot allow current foreign policy considerations to
override our obligation in this critical area. Anthony Barsamian
cogently and forcefully reminds us why such an omission is
unacceptable, and I ask that his moving, thoughtful remarks be printed
here.

Assembly Board of Directors Chairman Anthony Barsamian’s Remarks at the
“International Refuge, Relief and Recognition Tribute”–February 24,
2005

Your Eminence, Reverend clergy, Your Excellencies, Ladies
and Gentlemen,
This remembrance and recognition highlights two issues of
critical importance to the horrific recurrence of Genocide
and the apparent impotence of the world to stop this crime
against us all.
First, the history of genocide must remain inviolable and
periodically affirmed regardless of political discomfort or
cost so that we may learn its lessons.
Second, the actions of 3rd parties are vital to raising
awareness about the crime as soon as it becomes known, to
taking resolute steps to end the genocidal process, to bring
to account the perpetrators, to provide comfort to the
survivors, and to forever remember all instances of genocide.
This is why the Armenian Assembly joined with the AGBU and
the Diocese to remember those nations and organizations that
took action while the Armenian Genocide was being carried out
and subsequently. Armenians remain deeply indebted to all who
refused the easy path of indifference and inaction. You saved
lives, you affirmed the truth, and you bore witness so that
the world would be better equipped to act on the meaning of
“Never Again”.
As is evident today, the Republic of Turkey refuses to
accept the judgment of history that the Ottoman Turkish
government committed genocide against its Armenian minority.
Instead, Turkey attempts to impose its revisionism on a
civilized world that knows better, but occasionally succumbs
to Turkish demands and intimidation by refraining from
affirming the truth. Nations who had initially committed to participate
in this
recognition commemoration withdrew in the face of such
Turkish pressure. This solves nothing. The dead are not
honored for their sacrifice. The actions of the righteous are
not recalled. And ironically, the descendants of the
victimizers are not allowed to come to terms with the truth.
Nevertheless, we pause today as we begin this 90th
commemorative year to give thanks to all nations and
organizations that came to our aid–but particularly to those
that attended today despite the Turkish government’s campaign
to stop you.
For Turkey’s state sponsored denial effort, having this
event is a defeat. This is a good day for the truth. As
Armenian-Americans, we recall with special appreciation the
leading role of the United States in attempting to prevent
the Armenian Genocide and in aiding those that survived. As
Armenian-Americans, we look to the United States to continue
this proud chapter of American history by reaffirming the
facts of this most calamitous chapter of Armenian history.
There is an inevitability to universal affirmation of the
Armenian Genocide, and America has not and will not be an
exception.
A case in point is the recently concluded visit of U.S.
Ambassador to Armenia John Evans with major Armenian-American
communities across the country. In his public commentaries,
Ambassador Evans repeatedly employed the words “Armenian
Genocide” to properly characterize the attempted
annihilation of our people by Ottoman Turkey.
This is in keeping with President Reagan’s proclamation of
April 22, 1981 where he stated in part, “like the genocide
of the Armenians before it, and the genocide of the
Cambodians which followed it–and like too many other
persecutions of too many other people–the lessons of the
Holocaust must never be forgotten”. . .
And also with the thrust of President Bush’s 2001 to 2004
April 24 messages that set forth the textbook definition of
genocide without using the word. Ambassador Evans completed
the thought.
The Ambassador’s characterization also is in keeping with
the public declarations of over 120 renowned Holocaust and
Genocide scholars regarding “the incontestable fact of the
Armenian Genocide”.
Further, Ambassador Evans’ characterization conforms to the
summary conclusion of the International Center for
Transitional Justice on the use of the term Armenian
Genocide. ICTJ stated that “the Events, viewed collectively,
can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime
of genocide as defined in the Convention, and legal scholars
as well as historians, politicians, journalists and other
people would be justified in continuing to so describe
them.”
The Armenian-American community will not rest until the
United States formally and irrevocably reaffirms the Armenian
Genocide. By so doing, we forever advance the special role of
the United States in genocide prevention.
Today, we are here to honor 17 nations who have joined the
movement towards universal affirmation of the Armenian
Genocide. You have appropriately remembered this instance of
man’s inhumanity to man. You have stepped forward to combat
denial and revisionism. We will never forget your solidarity.
As Voltaire said, “to the living we owe respect, but to
the dead we owe only the truth”.

____________________