A happy ending for all
By Burak Bekdil

Turkish Daily News
Dec 21 2004

TDN – Everyone looked like a winner after Friday’s historic EU summit.
If there was a genuine winner, though, it was “diplomacy.” How
could, otherwise, the final statement please Tassos Papadopoulos and
Rauf Denktas at the same time? How could it be possible, without
a skillfully crafted wording, to please Ankara, Athens, Brussels,
Berlin, Paris, London, Vienna, Rome, Copenhagen, Washington, the Arab
capitals and probably half of the other hemisphere?

The final statement is like a fairy tale: a happy ending for all. On
Friday Istanbul’s stock market closed at an all-time high. The next
day, thousands of Turks, waving Turkish and EU flags, took to the
streets to welcome the “Conqueror of Europe,” their prime minister,
in scenes perhaps too grotesque for a celebration Europeen. Probably
few in the chanting crowd knew what was there to celebrate.

Mr. Denktas, the Turkish Cypriot leader, thanked Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan for not “selling out the Turkish Cypriots” and for
“standing firm in his bargaining with the Europeans.” A few miles
to the south, Greek Cypriot leader Papadopoulos remained confident
that the strings attached to Oct. 3 would automatically guarantee
what he wanted.

No doubt, after over 40 years in the EU’s waiting room, a date for the
start of formal entry talks is a victory. But the strings attached
to the much-wanted date may put off the start of talks, suspend it,
or even if the talks open, membership may never take place, and even
if Turkey eventually joins the club, it may only get a second-grade
contract.

The trouble is, the Turks only want the gains from membership and not
the drains. They are not and probably will not be prepared to give
up the sacred sovereignty that does not fit into the club rules. For
example, different crowds with different intentions will probably
take to the streets when Turkey will be required to negotiate with the
Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), or ponder autonomy for the Kurds, or
recognize the so-called Armenian genocide, or agree to not-so-favorable
conditions as for the Aegean territorial disputes with Greece.

Not only that, but, for the time being, the Turks are shrugging off
the possibility of permanent safeguards restricting the free movement
of Turkish workers and Turkish access to EU regional funds and farm
subsidies. But such discriminatory terms and conditions that violate
EU law will be real explosives as talks mature.

It is perhaps too early to sit down and ponder. Inevitably, by the
time Turkey joins the EU there will be a much different EU and a much
different Turkey. For example, a falling birthrate across the EU means
a shrinking and ageing population, raising the specter that there will
not be enough workers to pay for increasingly burdened pension systems.

In contrast, Turkey’s population is young and on the rise (about 80
million by 2015, with more than two-thirds under 35 years of age).
Demographics per se can change the terms and conditions of Turkish
entry in the future. But the shorter-term problem will be, once
again, Cyprus.

On Dec. 17 Turkey pledged to extend its 1963 Association Agreement with
the then EEC, known as the Ankara Protocol, to 10 new member states
including Cyprus, before the start of accession talks – a de facto
recognition by Ankara of Cyprus. On the other hand, Mr. Erdogan has
repeatedly said that Turkey would not recognize Cyprus, directly or
indirectly, until there is a comprehensive settlement on the divided
island. In nine months’ time, it will be extremely difficult for
Mr. Erdogan to keep both promises.

Mr. Papadopoulos has a point when he says that no one can object if
Cyprus vetoes the start of membership talks with Turkey on Oct. 3 if
Turkey does not recognize Cyprus. How will it be possible for Mr.
Erdogan to overcome a likely Cypriot veto without causing dust and
storms in his homeland?

The immediate answer is a return to the U.N.-sponsored table for a
fresh round of negotiations. But will the Greek Cypriots have any
genuine reason to “share sovereignty” with their one-time neighbors
when the slow-fuse time bomb clicks for Ankara?

Obviously, Mr. Erdogan will sweat a lot next summer when he has
to explain to millions of dubious Turks that the extension of the
Ankara Protocol to Cyprus and nine other member states will not mean
recognition. Alternatively, his government may try to extend the
protocol “with an acknowledgement of the division of Cyprus,” but,
again, that will probably fail to block a Cypriot veto.

Of course, there is going to be a massive media campaign in Turkey
in the run-up to October, and in favor of the start of talks “despite
all,” but that may be politically costly for Mr. Erdogan’s government.

On Saturday, the Conqueror of Europe was probably wearing one of his
last smiles over EU affairs. He successfully tackled the easy part of
a long journey. But the far more difficult part remains ahead. Once
again, Cyprus stands in the way between Ankara and Brussels. The
summit has not resolved the dispute but has put it on ice for another
nine months.

–Boundary_(ID_meRrYMdZzTnmWSy4Zz0mEA)–

KOCHARIAN DISCUSSES PACE OF SOCIAL SECURITY REFORMS

ArmenPress
Dec 21 2004

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 21, ARMENPRESS: Armenian president Kocharian held
a working meeting today with prime minister, labor and social issues
minister, central bank governor and other government officials to
discuss the pace of reforms in the social security system.

Kocharian’s press office said the president drew the attention of
the present to the fact that though some parts of the social security
reform were discussed and several ministries have taken appropriate
steps there is not yet a comprehensive relevant program.

“We have not a single document that would outline what we are going
to do and what we are going to demand from the ministries, while
reforming the system requires a well-coordinated and persistent work,’
Kocharian was quoted as saying.

The president described reforming this sector as “being the most
difficult and protracted,” adding that the fragmented studies could be
used for developing a comprehensive program to start its implementation
next year.

Kocharian instructed to set up a task force that has to involve
skilled and seasoned experts from all ministries and other government
departments to work out a general concept on reforms within a month.

BOTULISM KILLS FIVE PEOPLE, AFFECTS 43 OTHERS THIS YEAR

ArmenPress
Dec 21 2004

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 21, ARMENPRESS: Forty-nine cases of a rare disease
known as botulism were registered in Armenia this year, killing
five and causing a great deal of suffering to 43 others, including
8 children below the age of 14.

Though most of these cases involve babies whose immune systems aren’t
as strong as older kids and adults, so they can’t fight off the
bacteria, botulism usually occurs after eating improperly cooked or
preserved foods. The botulism bacteria release a poison, also called
a toxin, which travels through the blood to attach to the nerves that
control your muscles.

This year’s cases outnumbered 13 botulism cases reported last year
with 17 people affected three of whom died.

Botulism cases in Armenia occur usually in winter when many families
start eating home-made preserves, despite the health ministry’s warning
against using such food or its instructions to at least thorough cook
such food by boiling it for ten minutes to destroy the botulism toxin.

ARMENIAN GIRL RECOGNIZED BEST PHOTO MODEL IN ISTANBUL

ArmenPress
Dec 21 2004

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 21, ARMENPRESS: Anush Grigorian, a student of a
linguistic university in Yerevan, was rated fourth out of 180 girls
from 92 countries at an international Best World Model contest
in Turkish Istanbul and recognized as the best Photo-Model. Her
participation was sponsored by the Turkish government.

Speaking to a news conference today Anush Grigorian said when she had
learned that she would have to fly to Turkey her first idea was to
reject the invitation, but when in Turkey she was surprised at a very
warm welcome she was given there. “Turks treated all participants
equally warm but I felt a sort of special attention towards me,”
she said.

Anush Grigorian was recognized also as Miss Tourism at a recent
contest in China.

The Armenian Diaspora
By Etyen Mahcupyan

Zaman newspaper
5 December 2004

We can say that diaspora groups live everywhere in the world in an
environment where they feel ‘out of sorts.’

It is not easy to be the object of a state of permanent and mandatory
guest-hood where they painstakingly learn the language and culture
of a society and as they do, get alienated from themselves.
Especially if one has, like the Armenians, a past
filled with pain, if one has been forcefully torn away from their
homeland and have been so heartbroken as to consider the possibility of
return a sort of non-issue; then being in the diaspora translates into
a very heavy emotional burden. To sum up in a single sentence, the
Armenian diaspora today is ‘the East within the West…’ These people
who were forced to depart from their homelands had to quickly adapt
to modernity of the Western countries they arrived in. This state of
being torn away led to an unavoidable process of individualization,
standing on your own feet, getting into multiple relations with the
people and institutions in the arrived countries. The requirements
of the workplace and especially the needs of children often eroded
the patriarchal codes of the family and a type of normlessness was
experienced in relation to how much the West lured the children away.
Consequently, the destiny of the Eastern diaspora in
the West is necessitated by the fact that the individualization
experienced in the socio-economic sphere does not correspond to
anything in the cultural sphere; more explicitly stated, they have to
sustain their identity within the alienation of the culture offered
them there…

Consequently, in order to retain their own identity, the Armenians had
to reform their communities in the Western world. Their identities
that had been fragmented at the individual level were reproduced anew
over such togetherness. And for this reason, from the viewpoint of
diaspora Armenians, ‘identity’ turned into a characteristic that
could be supported not as an individual but only as a community.
While communal activities became the only functional realm holding
them together, the expression of identity politics was also abandoned
to the charge of the aforementioned organizations… The communal
diaspora organizations acquired immunity and sometimes even a kind of
sacredness in the work they undertook because of the implied meanings
of identity. Hence, while the ‘individual’ implied a subject bounded
by personal life, societal participation was sought and lived through
the ‘community.’

The meaning of this is that it led communal politics to possess force
to create hegemony over the individual. On the other hand the Armenian
community continued to sustain a spiritual hierarchy within itself
because of its communal logic and its Ottoman past. Yet the secular
societies of the West were not made up of a character that would
permit the spiritual leadership to assume, as it did in the Ottoman
case, a political leadership as well… Hence today this political
vacuum is being filled by the political elite heading the communal
organizations in the Armenian diaspora. Yet the political elite of
the Armenian elite that had weak democratic traditions in its own
inception and that still reproduced itself anew within a patriarchal
mentality can be transformed into a type of political oligarchy….

And political oligarchy reproduces itself anew and fortifies its
position through radicalism, for radicalism contains this image that
implies it defends Armenian culture much more. In so far as no one
can claim that Armenian culture should be defended less, radicalism
naturally becomes the only politics… And what emerges is a nationalist
stand that centers on the absence of consideration that is in reality
without any ‘political backbone.’ While the diaspora imagines itself
to be engaged in politics, it actually remains contained by hardening
intra-community politics. The protective instinct created by sudden
change of living space creates, in the end, a reactionism that freezes
time, fixes the community, and obstructs politics by pushing it into
irrational channels.

–Boundary_(ID_afQEgtsAqv5mRuDzqpNxcA)–

Armenians Once Again!

Radikal newspaper
12/20/2004

When the European Union occupied the agenda of our lives entirely,
we turned around and looked at them in anger. There they had appeared
again. And they were even worse than the Kurds. Their existence
was never forgotten, never made to forget. Even into elementary
school curricula education we placed learning units about how we as
Turkish citizens can protect ourselves, our nation and our glorious
past against their claims. In order to be convincing in our denial,
we had to poison our children with this hatred and bestow upon them
a language to employ against this eternal enemy rights after the
reading and writing and the multiplication table. We tried for so long
and could not manage to do it. Now, as fully equipped tiny Turkish
officers, you start right away to fight against the ghosts of the past.
We could not get rid of employing official language practices such
as ‘the Armenians have once again gone rabid,’ ‘Armenian terror,’
‘Armenian seed’ that have totally lost its composure and dignity.
To top it all, we even tried to get the dark eyed, reticent children
in the Armenian schools of this motherland whose cultural mosaic we
now try to market to memorize this terminology. Of how Armenians were
such treacherous, deceitful enemies.

The talented musician Arto Tuncboyaciyan who multiplies the sounds of
this land in the United States narrates in the Postexpress journal:
“When I was six years’ old…I attended an Armenian school. Everyday we
had two hours of Turkish history there. In those history lessons I
learned how bad my own culture and Greek culture were. That was the
only thing we learned. Can you imagine the psychology of a six year
old child? When I got out of school, I could not look at peoples’
faces for those people were like my enemy. Just recently, about
ten days ago, they covered the course book of the National Security
course. In that book too it is as if two enemies are living together.
People do not know these things that I am talking about. We have to
talk about the things that deeply disturb us.”

The Turkish Armenians have always been forced to hide.
It has not been long ago, we still remember the
attacks against Hrant Dink and the Agos newspaper that made a news
item out of a claim strengthened by the statement of the historian
and linguist Pars Tuglaci. Tuglaci, who was a close friend of Gokcen,
stated that Gokcen (an adopted daughter of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and
the first woman pilot of Turkey – MG) knew she was an Armenian but
remained silent on this matter because she was fearful of the reactions
it would produce. Of course, the reactions of the brave Turkish
nationalists against the claim that Gokcen had been ‘Turkified’ much
later through a manufactured imaginary family line were indeed violent.
The claim that Ataturk’s adopted daughter was Armenian was evaluated
as blasphemy, slander and mudslinging. And that was not enough, the
General Staff of the Turkish Military warned the media on the subject
of ‘dangerous’ thoughts. The Turkish Air flight Society decreed that
“knowingly or unknowingly there is an attempt to destroy another value
of being a Turk.” The crime of Hrant Dink and Agos was of a kind that
could never be forgiven. Immediately pillagers appeared on their
footsteps crying out ‘We may suddenly descend upon you one night,’
‘Love it or leave it.’ As the strongest, longest living taboo, the
‘Armenian’ topic never let go of us.

Abdullah the Lizard

We ranted a lot about the Armenians. As they could not say anything,
as they continued to exist in this country as shadows, we kept
elaborating on the history our elders wrote with an increasingly
irritable language. Against the ill-temper of the diaspora Armenians,
we became even more ill-tempered and ill-treated more and more the
citizens with whom we lived together. But now it is their turn to
speak. After being silent for a century, they have many stories to
tell. We have to make it a priority to listen to them. We all have
a lot to learn from the story of having to live on these lands as
Armenians. I want to share with you an editorial of Hrant Dink,
summarizing it a little.

“The year is 1918, a village on the skirts of the Suphan mountain.
He had barely escaped from all that had transpired. He had barely found
refuge. To the village of Ismail of the Pelteks. There he was mixed
into the peasants living away. It was as if the shadowy shelter he had
made at a corner of the sheep fold was as big as the thin crack between
the two stones on the built wall. Like the lizards at the corners
of those cracks… He lived hiding away. He occasionally surfaced,
appeared next to those whose hearts carried some sense justice,
helped out with the harvest, sweated as much as he was capable,
had some bread, and returned to his shelter. His new name among the
peasants was Abdullah. ‘The one Allah sent.’ There he lived away in
a hole in the wall Allah had forgotten. Until Memo, the third son
from the last of the Pelteks of Ismail saw him peeing by a wall.
He jumped and started running away shouting. “Run here, you guys’
he shouted, ‘Look at Abdullah’s. His has a cap on it.’ It is narrated
that Abdullah’s escape from the wall to the sheep fold was just like
that of a lizard. Soon after stones started to rain on the sheep fold.
Young old, everyone had gathered and were stoning the fold shouting:
‘come out, infidel, we know who you are, come out.’ After a while
the shouts came closer and turned into footsteps. The door of the
fold opened. The first to enter was Ismail of Pelteks who had always
protected Abdullah, followed by others. Ismail stopped the ones
behind him, took a step forward. ‘Where are you Abdullah, come here
so I can save you, give me your hand.’ Ismail’s hand did indeed touch
the hand Abdullah had extended, but he suddenly withdrew startled.
What was extended was a bloodied piece of skin. Ismail turned to
those behind him. ‘Let’s go guys, leave the poor thing alone, we’re
going out.’ After that they left the circumcised Abdullah alone.
They did not touch him again. Those of you who as children have
hunted lizards would know. When you reach out and grab them only
their tails remain in your hand. The year is 2004. Some (newspaper)
has declared on their headline ‘Look at the Armenian.’ (As a reaction
to the Armenian lobby in Europe protesting Turkey’s candidacy to the
European Union on the grounds of Turkey’s denial of the events of 1915
– MG). Some people are obviously out to hunt lizards. And I now feel,
don’t let it be misunderstood, of course not because I am frightened
or humiliated, like ‘Abdullah the lizard,’ go figure? Forgive me,
must be in the nature of being a reptile!”

We have to listen to Hrant Dink who states that “To situate one’s
identity in relation to the existence of the other is sickly.
If you need an enemy to keep your identity alive, your identity is
diseased.” By not forgetting that both the diaspora Armenians and
Turkish nationalists are stricken with the same illness, by tenderly
cherishing all the identities living on these lands, we can beckon
those days when all these identities will live by protecting each
other’s stories. We can establish our world on painful confrontations
cleansed of secrets and lies. Starting from ground zero.

Memoirs are being written

You should immediately read the memoir entitled ‘My Grandmother’ by
Fethiye Cetin, a member of the Istanbul Bar Association and the Human
Rights Executive Council. The story of her grandmother Seher is also
the reality of these lands. For the adventure that starts with her
telling the granddaughter she loved very much that her real name was
Heranus, that she had witnessed the violence at tehcir, that is, the
march of death is the adventure that belongs to all of us. The story
that Cetin narrates with great sincerity is not about the unknown
rituals of faraway lands. Unless we know the long life and existence
of Heranus, whose identity papers had the notation ‘convert’ writ on
it, who in her old age asked her granddaughter to track down those of
her family who survived, unless we know how she lived like a ‘lizard’
yearning for her family from whose bosom she was torn away as a puny
little girl, unless we do all of this, we will not be able to develop
any thoughts or feelings about a people whose roots were eradicated
one way or another. For us to be able to not only look the Armenians
who have remained among us in the face but also to look each other
in the face, the memoirs of no one should be buried into darkness.

You must also read Takuhi Tovmasyan’s extraordinary ‘Cookbook-Memoir’
entitled ‘May Your Table be Plentiful.’ What remains in her memory
and palate from the kitchen of her grandmothers also reflects the
traces of a culture we pretended until now to not exist.

Finally, let us once again listen to Hrant: “We should not really think
of the disappearance of Armenians solely as the absence of one group.
With their three thousand year old settled existence, the Armenians
were the driving force of these lands. They were the craftsmen,
artisans, merchants. They carried the cultural and artistic power
of this society to the West. They were close to the West with their
economy as well: the entrance of Western culture into this society
was through their windows. What happened? We eradicated the roots of
all of them. Left behind neither a craftsmen nor an artisan. I read
the books of that period. There was a college in Harput providing
instruction in seven languages for instance.

In Harput, Van, Erzincan, Erzurum, there was unbelievable development.
I sometimes think that if the Armenians were still living in those
lands, today it would have been the West that would have imploring us
‘Let us be together.'”

–Boundary_(ID_DfqKXjLiHusqO+oqQhM3BA)–

U.N.: Almost a million refugees face hunger in 2005
By JONATHAN FOWLER

The Associated Press
12/21/04 11:09 EST

GENEVA (AP) – Around a million refugees could face hunger and
malnutrition next year because of meager donations from governments
of more prosperous countries, the United Nations said Tuesday.

Several hundred thousand refugees are already struggling to survive
because aid agencies have had to drastically reduce rations to ensure
there is enough to go round, said Ron Redmond, spokesman for the
U.N. high commissioner for refugees.

“We are especially worried for refugees in Africa,” Redmond told
reporters.

In Zambia, handouts already have been halved in the past two months
and soon will be slashed again, putting 87,000 people at risk of
malnutrition.

“Already, we are hearing reports of refugee women resorting to
prostitution to support themselves and their children,” Redmond
added. “Field offices in Zambia also report there has been a marked
increase in children dropping out of school, presumably to help their
families find food.”

In Tanzania, rations were cut by a quarter in October. UNHCR and the
World Food Program found last month that malnutrition is rising among
some 400,000 refugees from Burundi and Congo who live in Tanzania’s
camps.

Malnutrition also threatens some 118,000 refugees in Ethiopia, and
another 224,000 in Kenya, Redmond said.

In conflict-ravaged Congo, WFP says that next month it will need to
make ration cuts of almost one third, Redmond noted.

“Africa is not the only continent facing a breakdown in the food
pipeline,” he said.

In January, 140,000 displaced a decade ago by conflict between Armenia
and Azerbaijan face a complete cut in rations – just two months after
handouts were halved.

Non-U.N. aid agencies also have sounded the alarm, but some have
chastised the United Nations for failing to respond fast enough
to crises.

On Monday, U.S.-based Refugees International said the world body was
moving too slowly to hand out food to people who fled the conflict
in Ivory Coast.

But the Rome-based WFP said Tuesday it can only provide food assistance
to refugees who have a registration and a ration card issued by UNCHR,
given the limited resources of the agency. The ration card is the
only document that makes a refugee eligible for U.N. food assistance.

“We need to be absolutely sure that who gets the food is in need of
it,” said Caroline Hurford, WFP spokeswoman. “Otherwise, what would
we tell our donors?”

Hurford said food supplies are already in the border zone. But many
Ivorians are going back to Ivory Coast to harvest their crop and then
returning to Liberia to look for extra food.

“The process of feeding is not always easy with flows of population
going back and forth,” she said.

Associated Press writer Marta Falconi in Rome contributed to this
report.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

FRENCH FM: “A NUMBER OF ISSUES, INCLUDING THE ‘GENOCIDE’ CLAIMS, WILL
BE DISCUSSED DURING TURKEY’S EU TALKS”

Cumhuriyet, Turkey
Dec 21 2004

French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said yesterday that a number of
issues, including the so-called Armenian genocide, would come up for
discussion during Ankara’s European Union accession talks. Speaking to
French radio, Barnier said that the negotiations would be difficult
and could last for years. In related news, France’s Parliament is
expected today to discuss Turkey’s EU membership bid. /Cumhuriyet/

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 375033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 1) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 1) 52.48.46
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:

December 21, 2004

ACNIS Releases Opinion Polls on Armenia’s Political Agenda

Yerevan — The Armenian Center for National and International Studies
(ACNIS) today issued the results of both a public survey and a
specialized questionnaire on “Urgent Issues on Armenia’s Political
Agenda,” which involved 2002 citizens and 100 experts from Yerevan and
across Armenia. The poll addressed patterns and priorities in European
integration, Armenia-Diaspora relations and Armenian foreign policy,
as well as education, youth, and minority affairs.

ACNIS founder Raffi Hovannisian greeted the invited guests and public
participants with opening remarks. “This comprehensive survey covers
a broad range of items on the national agenda, and revisits a number
of urgent policy questions broached by ACNIS over the year past. It is
our hope that the findings will provide a solid basis for recording,
evaluating, and interpreting public attitudes in the light of more
specialized opinions,” Hovannisian said.

ACNIS legal and political affairs analyst Stepan Safarian presented the
results on European integration, comparing in detail the conclusions
of the expert and public opinion polls. Accordingly, 64% of citizens
surveyed and 92% of experts are in favor of Armenia’s accession to
the European Union, 11.8% and 7% respectively are not, while 24.2%
and 1% find it difficult to answer. 29.4% of citizens first and
foremost expect improvements in the economic situation from Armenia’s
accession to the European Union, whereas 49% of experts anticipate
the establishment of irreversible democracy. 16.7% of citizens and 3%
of experts look forward to a just resolution of the Karabagh issue,
9.7% and 5% respectively to development of education and science
in accordance with European standards, 8.7% and 6% to a decrease
of corruption, and 7.3% and 14% to raising the level of national
security. 11.9% of respondent citizens and 6% of experts do not
expect anything. 31.3% of citizens view the foreign and domestic
policies pursued by Armenia’s authorities as the major obstacle to
Armenia’s policy of European integration, 29.4% regional conflicts,
and 13.6% the Armenian people’s “mindset.” Among the experts these
figures are 65%, 13%, and 11%, respectively. 16.7% of citizens think
it will take Armenia up to 15 years, 15.6% up to 20, 10.2% up to 25,
and 14.8% up to 50 years, to fulfill the criteria of the European
Union and become its member. Among the relative optimists, 11.1%
think it will take 5 years and 20.8% 10 years. 13% of experts believe
it will take 5 years, 21% 10 years, 10% 15 years, 27% 20 years, 14%
25 years, and 8% 50 years. 9.7% of citizens and 6% of experts predict
that Armenia will never become a member of the European Union. 28.7%
of citizens and 61% of experts are in favor of Turkey’s accession
to the European Union, 52% and 22% are not, while 19.3% and 16%
find it difficult to answer. 30% of surveyed citizens and 8% of
experts are concerned about losing attributes of national identity
and statehood as a result of accession to the European Union. 52.9%
and 87% respectively are not concerned about this.

ACNIS economic and diaspora affairs analyst Hovsep Khurshudian referred
to the poll results on the Armenia-Diaspora agenda. 50.2% of citizens
assert that the potential of the Diaspora has been sufficiently
employed for the establishment and development of Armenia, 23.6%
think it has been employed little, 12.5% very little, 6.9% fully,
just as 1.8% are of the opinion that it has not been employed at
all. Among the experts 14% opine that the potential of Diaspora has
been sufficiently employed, 32% little, 36% very little, 5% fully,
and 5% think it has not been employed at all. Among the broader
public the major expectation from the Diaspora is its work toward
international recognition of the Armenian Genocide (35.1%) and
its making investments in Armenia (27.7%), whereas a plurality of
experts will be satisfied if their compatriots in dispersion simply
remain Armenian (22%) or focus on making investments (22%). Next
on the expert list at 18% is the combining of efforts to facilitate
Armenian membership in the European Union, with another 18% noting the
priority of working toward international recognition of the Armenian
Genocide. 3% of citizens and of experts do not have any expectation
of the Diaspora. It is noteworthy that 5% of citizens and 8% of
experts underscore the importance of the Diaspora’s participation in
Armenia’s state administration. 20% of citizens and 16% of experts
are in absolute favor of dual citizenship. Another 42.6% and 44%
respectively favor it on condition that dual citizens also perform
military or alternative service, and that only those who are permanent
residents of Armenia exercise the right to elect and be elected. 24.1%
and 19% are against dual citizenship.

The majority of both citizens (70.5%) and experts (67%) are ill
disposed to Armenia’s dispatch of a 50-member military group to take
part in reconstruction works in Iraq. Only 15.6% of citizens and 24%
of experts are in favor of it, whereas 13.9% and 9% find it difficult
to answer. As for the current stage of the Karabagh peace process,
only 1.6% of citizens and 0% of experts are completely satisfied with
it, 11.4% and 5% are satisfied, 41% and 30% are concerned, while 21%
and 49% are very much concerned. 51.3% of citizens and 38% of experts
are positively disposed toward the fact that European structures are
more frequently referring to the regulation of the Karabagh conflict,
12% and 32% respectively express a negative opinion, 19.3% and 14%
are neither concerned nor satisfied with it, and the rest find it
difficult to answer.

Hranush Kharatian, chairperson of the National and Religious Minorities
Board of the Government of Armenia, offered a comment on what the
figures reveal upon the minorities agenda in Armenia. 69.6% of citizens
and 40% of experts think that sects and other religious minorities
constitute a danger for Armenia. As for the national minorities,
the majority of surveyed citizens and experts reject the notion that
they threaten the republic. 70.5% of citizens and 90% of experts look
favorably upon their compatriot Yezidis, 51.1% and 68% Kurds, 66.4%
and 95% Assyrians, 53.4% and 84% Jews, 71.7% and 97% Greeks, 79% and
86% Russians, 53.9% and 91% Georgians, 65.6% and 97% Germans. 10.8%
of citizens and 3% of experts find signs of danger among the Jewish
community, 7.3% and 3% the Kurds, 6.8% and 1% the Georgians, 2.2% and
0% the Germans, 2.1% and 0% the Yezidis, 0.8% and 8% the Russians. As
for sexual minorities, 61.1% of citizens and 30% of experts do not
accept and are intolerant toward them, 24.3% and 56% do not accept
but are tolerant of them, and only 8.3% and 11% respectively think
it is natural and bear a normal attitude toward them.

In his corollary intervention entitled “Tolerance or Intolerance,”
Avetik Ishkhanian, chairman of Armenia’s Helsinki Committee,
continued the deliberations on the minorities issue by expressing
his satisfaction with the high level of tolerance toward national,
religious, and even sexual minorities, which testifies to the gradual
deepening of progressive views in Armenian society. “Another major
achievement is the public’s precise awareness of its own rights,”
noted Ishkhanian, attaching importance to this trend as a positive
step toward establishment of a civil society.

Nouridjan Manoukian, chief of the Control Department for the Board
of Secondary Education of the Ministry of Education and Science,
presented the survey results on education matters. 4.3% of respondent
citizens and 0% of experts assess Armenia’s current educational system
as gratifying, 42.1% and 11% as good, 47% and 81% as unsatisfactory,
with 6.6% and 8% finding it difficult to answer. 16.6% of citizens
and 4% of experts are concerned about bribery in public schools
and universities, 7.7% and 5% about protectionism, 10.8% and 22%
the content of educational programs, 15.2% and 0% the unjustified
optimalization of schools, and 7.8% and 3% the scale of state financing
for educational institutions and other circumstances.

The pivotal issues for Armenia’s youth have recently assumed a new
appearance and new substance–lack of jobs, insufficient wages, absence
of equal conditions and opportunities for career advancement, and
so on. The poll results on youth concerns are especially alarming,
as the majority of citizens (65.5%) and experts (78%) do not see
a future for young people in Armenia. Only 18% and 13% are of the
opposite opinion, while 16.5% and 9% find it difficult to answer. 33.7%
of citizens view the absence of jobs as the main reason for a lack
of confidence in the future and 26.4% mark insufficient wages for
normal living, whereas the majority of experts (46%) point to the
moral-psychological atmosphere in the country and 27% to unequal
conditions and opportunities for progress and career. As for the
measures to be taken to stop youth emigration and to overcome the
problems they face, 50.7% of citizens and 29% of experts find it
necessary to provide jobs to educated young people through a close
cooperation among universities, enterprises, and organizations, 23.7%
and 24% respectively are for the encouragement of entrepreneurship
among young people through allocation of government loans, and 15.3%
and 24% hold that the educational system should be modernized in
correspondence with the modern demands of the labor market.

The formal presentations were followed by contributions by National
Press Club chairperson Narine Mkrtchian; Artashes Ghazakhetsian of
the Armenia 2020 Project; Anahit Bakhshian, principal of Derenik
Demirchian High School; Ruzan Khachatrian of the People’s Party
of Armenia; Spartak Seyranian of Yerkir weekly; Tamar Gevorgian of
the United Labor Party; Yerevan State University professor Vardan
Khachatrian; Hovhannes Hovhannisian of the Liberal Progressive Party;
former Yerevan mayor Vahagn Khachatrian; Vardan Vardanian of Aib-Fe
weekly; and several others.

Among the 2002 citizens polled, 43.1% of them are male and 56.9%
female; 16.3% are 16-20 years of age, 24.8% 21-30, 21.5% 31-40, 21%
41-50, 9.3% 51-60, 5.5% 61-70, 1.6% 71 or above. 43.9% of participating
citizens have received a higher education, whereas 22.1% incomplete
higher, 17.4% specialized secondary, 14.6% secondary, and 1.9%
incomplete secondary training. 53.6% are actively employed, 19.2%
are not, 5.5% are pensioners, 1.6% welfare recipients, and 20%
students. Urban residents constitute 59.6% of public respondents,
and rural residents make up 40.4%. 33.5% hail from Yerevan, the rest
from all of Armenia’s regions.

All 100 professionals who took part in the specialized poll are
from Yerevan. 73% of them are male, and 27% female; 22% are 21-30
years of age, 29% 31-40, 27% 41-50, 18% 51-60, 4% 61 or above. All
of the experts surveyed have received a higher education: 2% are
full professors, 20% are candidates of science (PhD), and 78% hold a
Master’s degree. The principal profession of 16% of the expert pool
is political science, 13% journalism, 9% engineering and architecture,
9% history, 9% Near Eastern studies, 8% linguistics, 6% economics, 6%
international relations, and so on. 29% of them work in state-run
institutions, 57% in non-governmental associations, and 14% at
international organizations.

Founded in 1994 by Armenia’s first Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi K.
Hovannisian and supported by a global network of contributors, ACNIS
serves as a link between innovative scholarship and the public policy
challenges facing Armenia and the Armenian people in the post-Soviet
world. It also aspires to be a catalyst for creative, strategic
thinking and a wider understanding of the new global environment. In
2004, the Center has focused primarily on public outreach, civic
education, and applied research on critical domestic and foreign
policy issues for the state and the nation.

For further information on the Center or the full graphics of the
poll results, call (3741) 52-87-80 or 27-48-18; fax (3741) 52-48-46;
e-mail [email protected] or [email protected]; or visit or

UN report on Iran minorities’ rights “political” – Armenian representative

Baztab web site, Tehran
21 Dec 04

The representative of Armenians in northern Iran, Geork Vartaniyan,
has said that the UN pursues political aims in censuring Iran for
violating the rights of religious minorities.

Commenting on the UN General Assembly resolution against Iran, he said:
The UN discusses this issue every so often, it is nothing new and we
all know the UN stance towards Iran.

Vartaniyan added: There are some problems in our country, but we are
trying to resolve them through legal channels. Up to now either they
have been resolved or are being resolved, but they are not such major
problems requiring the attention of international organizations.

He said religious minorities face problems in other countries,
including Turkey, but their problems are not as aggrandized as ours
in Iran.

Vartaniyan said: As a religious minority, our situation is
comparatively better than those who live in European or other Asian
countries, therefore, the [resolution] has been issued with political
aims in mind.