MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA
PRESS AND INFORMATION DEPARTMENT
375010 Telephone: +3741. 544041 ext 202
Fax: +3741. .562543
Email: [email protected]:

PRESS RELEASE

5 October 2004

Minister Oskanian Meets Finland’s Erkki Tuomioja

On 5 October, Foreign Minister Oskanian received Finland’s Foreign Minister
Erkki Tuomioja, who is on a regional visit to countries of the South
Caucasus.

The parties exchanged views on bilateral relations and international issues
of common interest. They stressed the importance of integration of South
Caucasus countries into the EU New Neighborhood program. Concerning this
issue, Minister Oskanian briefed Finland’s Foreign Minister on a recent
EU-Armenia cooperation council meeting in Brussels and agreements reached in
its framework.

In the context of European integration, the parties discussed the progress
and drawbacks of democratic reform in Armenia.

The parties also reflected on regional issues. Armenia’s Foreign Minister
offered a briefing on the current status of Nagorno Karabagh conflict
settlement and Armenia’s position on the issue.

The parties also discussed prospects of normalizing Armenia – Turkey
relations and stressed the importance of EU’s positive contribution to this
end.

At the end of the meeting, Minister Oskanian expressed his deep appreciation
for Minister Tuomioja’s visit both in the context of European dimension of
Armenia’s foreign policy and in terms of development of bilateral political
and economic relations.

After the meeting, Armenia’s and Finland’s Foreign Ministers signed an
Agreement between the Governments of the two countries on the Promotion and
Protection of Investments.

Prior to the signing ceremony, Finland’s Foreign Minister visited
Tzitzernakaberd Genocide memorial.

Sunday, October 03, 2004
************************************
FROM THE CRADLE OF CIVILIZATION
TO THE GRAVEYARD OF BARBARIANS
***********************************************
What if Saddam Hussein understands his own people better than the ablest American expert advising Bush? What if the only way to govern Iraq is by being a ruthless dictator willing to conduct genocidal war against unruly tribes? What if this is true of all tribal people, including Armenians? Hence the often-heard line: “We are not yet ready for democracy.” Is it conceivable that the cradle of civilization prefers a political system worthy of murderous barbarians?
*
In his book on Stalin, Montefiore writes that Mikoyan once delivered a speech in which he said: “Every citizen of the USSR should be an NKVD [later KGB] agent.”
*
Censorship is book burning without smoke and fire.
*
The only way to make money as a writer, Flaubtert once said, is by flattering the public. Zohrab put it more bluntly when he said, anyone can engage in prostitution, including lawyers (he was a lawyer). Which reminds me of the American joke: “Please, don’t tell my mother I am a lawyer. She thinks I am a pimp.”
*
An authentic charlatan knows instinctively that if he wants to deceive others, he must begin with himself. In other words, he consents to being his own first victim.
*
The incomprehensible nonsense of a charlatan will be the highest wisdom to another charlatan.
*
Charlatans operate on the assumption that they can fool all the people all the time. This false assumption limits their horizons, condemns them to mediocrity, and leads them to disappointment and defeat when they are finally and inevitably exposed.
*
When I write about charlatans I don’t expect their agreement; and sure enough, out come the cloven hooves.
#
Monday, October 04, 2004
************************************
SOLUTIONS.
ON POLITICS AND POLITICIANS.
WHAT IS HAPPINESS?
A PROBLEM OF IDENTITY.
**********************************
As for solutions to our problems, it is not easy finding solutions in a tribal environment dominated by jihadist leaders who will automatically reject all solutions that do not require the unconditional surrender of the opposition.
*
Do you really know what I think of politicians? I think the world would not be a much worse place if it were run by cab drivers and barbers.
*
I suspect the honesty of chauvinists whose patriotism finds expression only in verbal abuse.
*
About the word happiness: I consider it to be an untrustworthy word. Happiness for a sadist means someone he can torture. The problem is, what if, unable to find a masochist, he victimizes someone who may not be in a position to defend himself?
*
To think in terms of, “If he agrees with me he is smart, and if he disagrees with me he is a fool,” is to condemn oneself to learn nothing from others.
*
The search for identity, about which one hears a great deal today, is a luxury only people with full bellies can afford. To the hungry, there is only one legitimate search, that for food. The hungry may find what he is looking for but I doubt if a man without identity will ever find one, perhaps because you can find only that which exists.
*
There is a type of Armenian whose primary concern is to prove he is a better Armenian, as if Armenianism were a contest that he must win at all cost.
#
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
*******************************
FROM MY DIARY
*********************************
On the Bush/Kerry debate, a Canadian pundit comments: “Kerry made more sense but I would vote for Bush. Kerry is an intellectual who seems to be talking down to people. Americans are suspicious of intellectuals. They prefer presidents who are more like themselves.” What about Wilson, FDR, JFK, and LBJ? It seems to me, what one expects from a leader, or for that matter, a doctor, a lawyer, or any professional, is not companionship but competence.
*
On the radio, the haunting slow movement of Elgar’s Cello Concerto, which deserves to be heard as often as Dvorjak’s and Haydn’s. And I don’t even remember when was the last time I heard Khachaturian’s Cello Concerto. Was it ten or twenty years ago?
*
When asked if she had ever considered divorce, an English lady is said to have replied: “No, never. Murder several times, but divorce, never.” I read this in Jeffrey Archer’s PRISON DIARY, not a masterpiece but eminently readable.
*
Why is it that a silent woman looks wise, but a silent man dumb?
*
Unbelievable but true: Suleiman the Magnificent once wrote a poem in praise of a contemporary Turkish poet.
*
Is the word mogul related in any way to the word Mongol?
#
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
*************************************
ANOTHER PAGE FROM MY DIARY
***************************************
Overheard: “Lost my wife ten years ago. Run over by a car. Best thing that happened to me.”
*
Nothing gives me more pleasure than a volume of good cartoons. A definition of heaven for me would be a set of good cartoons that stretch to infinity; and a definition of hell, a set of bad translations of German metaphysical philosophers.
*
Schnabel playing Beethoven: He makes even the most tedious passages (and there are so many of them in the G Major Sonata) interesting.
*
Perhaps one reason we feel guilty when accused of a crime we did not even contemplate committing is that, at one time or another, we have probably committed the most unspeakable crimes in our dreams, most of which we may not remember.
*
At the funeral of an elder relative I am introduced to quite a few out-of-town Armenians, one of whom tells me: “Your name sounds vaguely familiar.” I am reminded of an old English joke that goes something like this: Two Englishmen meet in a pub.
“My name is Porter,” says the first.
“Mine is Shakespeare,” says the other.
“A familiar name,” comments the first.
“It should be,” replies the second. “I have been delivering milk in these parts for 35 years.”
*
Is it possible to be a political or religious leader and not to engage in some form of propaganda? — which also means, to mislead people into believing that half-lies are whole-truths?
#

[05-10-2004 ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan’]
————————————————- ———————
WHAT HAS ARMENIA NOT DONE? AND WHAT HAS IT DONE?
Source : “Golos Armenii” newspaper (Armenia)
Author: Marina Grigorian

The presentation of Ilham Aliev at the 59th session of the UN General
Assembly can amaze an uninformed person primarily by the number of
negative characteristics to the address of Armenia. And the vocabulary
of the Baku speechwriters was actually reduced to one attribute:
`illegal’. Aliev Jr. took his time in making heartbreaking complaints
to the participants in the General Assembly, alleging that whatever
Armenia has been doing in the region is illegal. Having read through
the text of the complaint one can only wonder: is there anything
`illegal’ that Armenia has NOT done with regard to the neighbor
country?

Yet, a person who is well informed about the situation in the region
understands immediately that this ardent speech can hardly be classed
as a political statement. Moreover, the AR President was pursuing
several aims, of which even the wish to make the world community cry
is not a priority. Its main purpose most probably was the inner PR,
because it is obvious that the regime heir faces rather serious
problems within the country, also of image nature. And what can help
the self-establishment of a desperately striving politician attempting
to gain his place in his own country, than militant anti-Armenian
hatespeech? So Baku did its best, mobilizing the intellectual
potential of the governing elite to create an embodiment of some
regional evil that does everything `illegally’, thus preventing `poor’
Azerbaijan to easily develop and widen at the expense of the
territories of the neighboring nations.

Unfortunately, the imagination of Aliev’s speechwriters did not go
beyond the `treacherous policy’, leading to `illegal mass population
of Armenians on the territories occupied’, `illegal drug traffic’,
`illegal economic activity’, `illegal expropriation of cultural and
architectural heritage’ and other time of `illegal activities’ of
Armenians and their supporters. This set of illegalities of
replenished by a clichéé on `the failure to comply with the UN
resolution’, the refugees, whose number again increased – they no
longer make `about a million’, but `over a million’, `aggression’ and
`grounds for terrorism’ – and it seems to be all the Azerbaijani
President can say from the UN tribune. Also, Aliev Jr. stressed the
importance of the donor countries’ activation – apparently the money
inflow aiming at `postconflict rehabilitation’ of the areas that
suffered war got somewhat weaker.

A subject for a special discussion is refugees and donor funding. For
over ten years Azerbaijan has been howling aloud about `million
refugees’ in wretched conditions, although its has repeatedly been
proved that the number is exaggerated. For over ten year this country,
so proud of its oil reserves and fabulous potential has no funds for
the settlement of people, whose status became a subject for political
manipulations and blackmailing of international community since the
day they appeared in the capital. It has been repeatedly pointed out
(and it is not to be forgotten) that the housing and property left in
Azerbaijan by the ousted Armenians would have been more than enough to
provide the Azerbaijani refugees and internally displaced persons at
least with housing.

Yet none of the apartments left was given to a refugee, the property
of Armenians became a source of money for the senior Baku officials,
who later took foreigner to see the refugee camps and narrated how
disastrous their condition is, pleading for another million
dollars. The millions were allocated, flowing past these camps, the
conditions of the refugees did not get any better, because, apart form
the ethnic cleansings of Armenians, the Azerbaijani political elite
has learned and adopted the democide policy with regard to its own
nation, the condition of which interests the Baku authorities only
from the perspective of political aims and has long ago become only a
very productive reason for extorting the donor funding.

President Aliev should be ashamed today, ten year after the military
actions were stopped, to speak about the disastrous condition of `one
million refugees’. This also sets one to think whether there is really
any oil in the pipeline or the endless talks about the oil money and
the major oil projects are only bluff for naïve people, used,
again, to enrich a group of tycoons, who still find nothing is enough:
the huge poverty left by Armenians, the oil dollars, the millions
allocated to Azerbaijan for post-conflict rehabilitation? And is this
greed not the true reason for the continuing inner instability in
Azerbaijan, that induces its President not only speak from the
standpoint of aggressive hate of Armenians but also again put his hand
out for help to silence the greedy elite down?

Let us however turn back to the presentation of Ilham Aliev. It is
obvious that Azerbaijan is trying to get a new UN resolution imposed,
this time – of a bluntly anti-Armenian nature. Up to now, constantly
demanding the implementation of the UN resolution, Azerbaijan is not
quite sincere, hoping that everyone has forgotten the real content of
the resolutions. Actually none of the four UN resolutions on the
Karabagh issue says anything about the aggression of Armenian party,
as Azerbaijan states. Moreover, these documents can actually be
considered pro-Armenian, as none of them actually uses the phrase `the
armed forces of the Republic of Armenia’, but vaguely speaks about
`Armenian forces’, thus, in fact, recognizing them to be Karabaghi. It
should also be noted that the demand `to remove the troops from
occupied territories’ should have long been voiced by Armenia. None of
the UN resolutions specified which are the occupied territories. And
if we speak about the troops withdrawal from the perspective of
international law, the dominance of which is insistently demanded by
Baku, it is Azerbaijan that should remove its tropes from those
territories that have undergone the post-conflict rehabilitation with
the active assistance of international community and which Mountainous
Karabagh Republic can consider occupied. These borderline regions,
where huge funding of the same UNDP and other donors were spent on the
restoration of infrastructure damaged in war now live in peace. At
least, this is what the world assistance what for, and it is not up to
us to ask what the millions of dollars were spent for. So why not take
out the troops and thus eliminate the tension source?

Let us now consider the position of the Armenian party. Naturally, the
first response when reading the stream of lies, hate and
desinformation that came crushing on our country and people was: why
was no response made by the head of Armenia? Why, instead of going to
General Assembly session, like Aliev and Sahakashvili did, Kocharian
went to China – it is hard to believe that the President did Nat
realize what the presentation of Aliev will be like and what the
response in Armenia to his Chinese voyage on these days would be – the
situation was easy to predict?

The response was partly given by the Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian in his presentation, and it became easier. However, the
question of why Kocharian did not speak in New York himself, thus
making the words weightier will be discussed for a long time – and in
unfavorable light for him, too.

We will dare to suppose that the visit to Beijing on these very days
is not incidental, but a well-thought tactic step. China is not only
increasingly gaining weight in world processes, but also a member of
the UN Security Council. And if this body decides to pass another
resolution on Mountainous Karabagh, Armenia will urgently need a veto
of a member – and why not China? Emotions on the tribune can be a good
PR step, but the real politics is made in the backstage. How much we
suffered because of the inability to use backstage as a political tool
– so may be this time we should trust this approach?

[05-10-2004 ‘Economic Development’]
———————————————————————-
WHAT OIL PRICES AND THE CASPIAN REMIND OF
Source : “Zaman” newspaper (Turkey)
Author: Kadir Dikbas

The lack of stability in different regions of the world and the
increasing oil demand in Far East, in particular, China and India,
resulted in oil price increase to 50 USD. The Caspian oil has not as
yet taken its position in the world market; however, under the
circumstances its importance increases.

The profitability of investment in Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, on
which Turkey insisted, was once again proved. The oil price increase
pleases all the investors in the Caspian.

The BTC pipeline, the construction of which at first seemed to be a
dream would be launched next year already. And the oil of Azerbaijan,
and later – of Kazakhstan will flow to the Mediterranean via
Ceyhan. So far Azerbaijan uses Baku-Supsa (Georgia) and
Baku-Novorossiysk (Russia) pipelines. But the bulk of oil awaits the
launch of Baku-Ceyhan pipeline.

Should everything go as predicted, the first tanker with Azerbaijani
oil will depart from Ceyhan Terminal in the first half of 2005. The
officials of Azerbaijan and Turkey announce there will be no delay,
and the pipeline will be launched in May next year the latest. It is
also expected that the gas pipeline constructed simultaneously, will
reach Erzrum next year.

The projects will somewhat milden the tension in Turkey which is very
dependent on imported oil and gas. Turkey will remain a consumer but
will also become an important transit linkage. The projects are also
important for the USA and Europe.

Along with this other development occur around us too. Iran intends to
start importing natural gas to Armenia. The final agreement of
constructing a pipeline was signed by the two countries in early
September in Yerevan.

The construction of the Armenian part of the pipeline will be funded
by the Iranian Exports Development Bank that will give Armenia a loan
of 30 million USD. By the agreement, the loan will be repaid through
the electricity generated with the use of Iranian gas. Among the
bidders for the construction of this part of the pipeline is the
Russian `Gazprom’ company. The pipeline, the cost of which is
evaluated to be 220 mln. USD, will be launched in 2007.

Armenia and Iran divided the construction into parts so as not to
exceed the 30 mln USD threshold, imposed by the USA. The D’Amato Law,
passed by the US, imposes sanctions on companies who sign agreements
with Iran for amount exceeding 40 mln. USD.

In 1997 in the same way Turkmen gas was transported via Iran.

Important are the developments in Central Asia, too. Kazakhstan, who
uses Russian routes to market energy, in 2001 launched the Caspian oil
pipeline that goes to Novorossiysk. The capacity of the pipe comes to
28 mln. tons of oil, which is not enough for Kazakhstan, whose
production and exports grow. The need for a new pipeline has matured
so as to start the development of new fields.

There is news of new routes to China, too. Last week the second stage
of the pipeline construction started to transport oil from Kazakhstan
to China. This is the first oil route from Kazakhstan that bypasses
Russia. The oil pipeline from the western Kazakhstan will reach the
Chinese Kansu province. The length of the pipeline makes 1,000
km. Its construction will end in 2006 and the first oil will flow to
China. The capacity of the pipe is 10 million tons.

The cost of the project, implemented with the financial guarantee of
China is 700 million USD. At the last stage the length of the
pipeline by 2011 will reach 3,000 km, the capacity rising to 20
mln. tons. The overall cost of the project will make 3 billion USD.

Big money and bog project. The main task of china today is to secure
the growing oil demand, diversifying the sources. Thus the project is
of vital importance to China. And Kazakhstan is getting a new,
insatiable market.

The oil of the Caspian will be much talked about in future.

[02-10-2004 ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan’]
———————————————————————-
AZERBAIJANI GOLD FILLS ARMENIAN STATE BUDGET
Source : “Echo” newspaper (Azerbaijan)
Author: N. Guliev, N. Aliev

The problem of Armenia’s illegal use of gold deposits, located on the
occupied territories, will be resolved at International Court.

Starting from next year, `royal tax’ – `royalty’, collected in many
countries for the use of natural resources, is introduced in
Armenia. In Armenia, like in many other countries (for the exception
of USA and some others), deposits are absolute property of the state,
which takes its `royal’ share from the use of mineral resources. In
accordance to the new legislation, royalty is calculated as 1% from
the sale of extracted mineral resources, excluding depreciation and
capital expenditures of the deposit exploiter.

The largest payers of this tax, to fill the neighbors’ state budget
still more, will be exploiters of gold deposits. The greatest part of
them is located on the occupied territories. Thus, the Armenian budget
will be replenished with Azerbaijani gold.

The Azerbaijani side has repeatedly raised the issue of Armenia’s
illegal use of Zodsk (Soyudlin), Drmbon (Gyzylbulag) and other
deposits. However, for the time to come Armenians manage to attract
even foreign investors to their mining. Thus the owner of Ararat Gold
Recovery Company (AGRC) is a Canadian First Dynasty Mines company that
controls the operation of both Sotksk (Zodsk), Meghradzor deposits and
the Ararat Gold Recovery Company. Their project is scheduled for 10
years and may be prolonged for additional 10 years. For the present
time, FDM has invested over 30 million USD in Armenian gold-mining
industry, particularly in the construction of gold recovery company in
Ararat, preliminary exploitation of Zodsk deposit.

One more investor – Indian Sterlite Industries, Ltd Company – operates
this very disputable deposit. According to Armenian media, the volume
of investments, planned for this project in 2004, is evaluated at
80-100 million dollars.

By the way, it turned out that the investor, having invested his
capital in the project, lost twice. Not only will the greatest portion
of the deposit, located on the occupied territories, immediately after
the resolution of Mountainous Karabagh conflict and even earlier be
claimed by the Azerbaijani side, but also the preliminary data on the
gold deposits, revealed by Armenian State Commission on Resources,
were inflated for 50% at the least. Thus, instead of the planned
content of about 6-7 grams per ton of precious metal in the ore, the
actual content does not surpass 2-4 grams per ton. Therefore, the
investors now have to conduct preliminary investigation for revealing
the actual amount of the reserves…

Meanwhile, Azerbaijan, as it was reported, takes all possible measures
to prevent extraction of gold from the deposit that lies on the
occupied territories. According to `Echo’, the head of the National
Service of geological investigation at the Ministry of Ecology and
Natural Resources of Azerbaijan, Shahbeddin Musaev, Zodsk deposit was
discovered in 1951 on the border of Kelbajar region from Azerbaijani
side and Basargechar region – from Armenian side. Despite the fact
that the greatest part of the deposit (75% of gold reserves) was on
the territory of Azerbaijan, the order of Geology Ministry of former
Soviet Union transferred it, for unknown reasons, to the Armenian
Geology Department. Its exploitation was started in 1976. In 1992, the
work was suspended because of Karabagh war. Throughout 1977-90, 27,6
tons of gold were extracted in this deposit, of which 20 thousand tons
– from the deposits located on Azerbaijani territory.

According to Sh. Musaev, the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources
seriously tackles the problem of putting a ban on operation of gold
deposits, located on the occupied territories. `The Armenian decision
for introducing royalty made us take more serious steps. Our Minister,
Huseyngulu Bagirov raises this issue at practically each international
forum, makes radical statements. We sent our statements, protests to
many organizations. Now, due to the active participation of the
Minister, foreign law firms got interested in this problem’.

Azerbaijani side is now seriously concerned with passing the dispute
to the International Court of Arbitration. Foreign experts are already
invited to help Azerbaijani lawyers work out documents for the
court. According to a government source, the Azerbaijani side has
activated all the diplomatic and legal resources, involved all state
structures responsible. `We want royalty, taxed for the use of
Azerbaijani mineral resources, to be paid to the state treasury of our
country and not to Armenia’, the source stated.

—
Yerevan Press Club of Armenia, ‘Yeni Nesil’ Journalists’ Union of
Azerbaijan and Association of Diplomacy Correspondents of Turkey
present ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan-Turkey: Journalist Initiative-2002’
Project. As a part of the project web site has
been designed, featuring the most interesting publications from the
press of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey on issues of mutual
concern. The latest updates on the site are weekly delivered to the
subscribers.

Dreaming West & Moving East?

The European Union & Turkey
Dr Harry Hagopian

Sta tements

Earlier this month, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican, expressed
the opinion that Turkey’s candidacy to the European Union would be
inadvisable since it would run against the ethos of Europe’s present
club of 25. Citing the Ottoman Turkish Empire’s past incursions into
the heart of Europe as proof of its disqualifying ‘otherness’, he
added that Turkey is ‘in permanent contrast to Europe’ and it would be
a mistake to link a predominantly Muslim secular republic of 70
million people to Europe within the framework of the Union.

In an acerbic editorial entitled Saying No to Turkey, the New York
Times upbraided the top Catholic theologian for being a ‘meddlesome
cleric’ who was inflaming an important debate. It suggested that the
Vatican was adopting this approach because it had failed to persuade
Europe’s leaders to enshrine Christianity in the final draft of the EU
Constitution. The editorial continued its criticism by adding that ‘it
would be refreshing if the cardinal had chosento emphasise the
positive potential in combining the best Christian tradition of
charity and the best Muslim tradition of social justice.’

Conversely, other commentators stressed that the Eurocentric values of
the European Union would be seriously undermined by Turkey’s
accession. They opined that the Council should not begin formal
accession talks with Turkey [in December 2004] unless it improved its
human rights record – one that is still noticeably chequered despite
some noteworthy efforts by Turkish Prime Minister Recip Tayyip
Erdogan. Many lobbying groups also added that Turkey should address
its illegal occupation of northern Cyprus and its continuing denial of
the Armenian Genocide of 1915 concurrently with the requisite economic
re-adjustments and socio-political improvements that were called for
by the Council of Europe under the five criteria framed in Copenhagen
in December 2002. Â

Articles

In an article in Zaman on 7 August 2004, Etyen Mahcupyan focused on
the Turkish Prime Minister’s recent visit to France. He argued that
François Hollande, leader of the French Socialist Party, had insisted
to the Turkish Prime Minister that the Armenian issue should be taken
up in the human rights context. Although the Copenhagen criteria do
not include the recognition of the Armenian Genocide as a precondition
for future accession, the Party leader had emphasised the unchanging
policy of the Socialist Party that Turkey ought to accept that those
events ‘took place’.

Mahcupyan’s article reminded his readers that ‘the European Union
institutions, the Armenian Diaspora, Armenia, the government of the
TurkishRepublic as well as the state, and finally, the Armenian
congregation in Turkey, all have different perceptions of the
“Armenian issue”, and that the political functions and meaning of
these approaches may differ from one other.’ He suggested that three
factors should be factored into the EU strategy: (i) Turkey’s own
objectives and its responsibility toward itself and its own society,
(ii) the role of political globalisation within the EU process, and
(iii) honesty over historical facts and truths. From a pan-Armenian
perspective, he added, this would imply that Turkey should stop
dodging the “Armenian issue” [by acknowledging its responsibility for
the events of 1915].

In an earlier article in Le Figaro on 26 July 2004 entitled Les
raisons de refuser la candidature d’Ankara, Alexandre Del Valle argued
against Turkey’s EU membership. He stressed that Turkey is
historically as much European as colonial France could ever be
considered African. He suggested that Turkey’s history, values and
‘civilisational conscience’ are Asiatic and that the Golden Age was
the apogee of the Ottoman Empire. Those few Turks in Istanbul who feel
European are offset, he added, by the huge masses that identify
themselves more closely with their Iraqi neighbours than with
Europeans. The author of La Turquie dans l’Europe, un cheval de Troie
islamiste?, who is viewed in somecircles as a controversial anti-Islam
iconoclast, cited the pan-Turkish policies in Central Asia and the
Caucasus as a sign that Turkey is a country that ‘dreams west and
moves east’.

Del Valle disputed the ‘irreversibility’ of Turkish EU candidacy on
the basis that it had signed an Association Agreement in 1963, or that
it was a member of NATO and the Council of Europe. He reminded his
readers that the official request for adhesion submitted by Ankara in
1987 was voted down by the European Parliament, which had in turn
demanded the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the improvement of
minority rights and the withdrawal of Turkish forces from Cyprus as
preconditions for membership. To date, Turkey has not fulfilled all
those pre-conditions. Furthermore, Del Valle disputed the claims that
Turkey remains a ‘lay exception’ and a natural ally against the rise
of Islamism. He wrote that an emerging Turkish re-Islamisation under
Menderes, Demirel and Turgut Ozal has led to the death of Kemalism and
that all indications of a re-Islamised society – from veils to
blasphemy cases – are becoming stronger every day.

Turning his attention to the geopolitical consequences of Turkish
adhesion to the EU, Del Valle refuted the claim that the integration
of Turkey into Europe would help enhance its democratisation
process. Underlining the Greco-Roman influences as much as
Judaeo-Christian culture of Europe, he argued that countries such as
the Ukraine, Byelorussia or Russia are infinitely more European – and
therefore more prone toward EU adhesion than Turkey. Admitting Turkey,
he added, would open a Pandora’s box of EU expansion whereby another
200 million Turkic people in the Caucasus and Central Asia, let alone
the people of the Maghreb, would vie for EU membership and create huge
problems with water, boundaries and minorities’ rights. He concluded
by emphasising that it would be a mistake to admit Turkey for the sake
of preserving a Kemalist exception in a post-Kemalist country and
thereby triggering an unmanageable process.

International Minorities Rights Standards

The European Council is due to decide in December 2004 whether Turkey
has met the Copenhagen political and economic criteria in order to
start formal accession talks, and whether it can also demonstrate the
‘stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law,
human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.’

What, therefore, is Turkey’s determining attitude vis à vis its
minorities today? Do its policies bolster its EU candidacy let alone
its claims for European identity and legitimacy? How do minorities
fare in Turkey today? Are Armenians, Greeks and Jews, alongside other
minorities who are not recognised in the Turkish Constitution,
guaranteed their human rights and fundamental freedoms? In this
context, the EU revised Accession Partnership has set out that Turkey
must:

Guarantee in law and in practice the full enjoyment of human rights
and fundamental freedoms by all individuals without discrimination and
irrespective of language, race, colour, sex, political opinion,
religion or belief in line with relevant international and European
instruments to which Turkey is a party â=80¦ Ensure cultural diversity
and guarantee cultural rights for all citizens irrespective of their
origin.

Two principal texts that set out international minority rights
standards are (i) the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the
Protection of National Minorities (FCNM) and (ii) the International
Covenant on Civil andPolitical Rights (ICCPR). To date, Turkey has
refused to sign the FCNM despite repeated requests by the
Parliamentary Assembly. It has also entered a reservation under
article 27 of the ICCPR limiting the rights under this Article only to
those minorities recognised under its Constitution or the Lausanne
Peace Treaty.

According to Minority Rights Group International (MRG), Turkey has
taken significant steps towards meeting the Copenhagen criteria. Ever
since the Justice and Development Party (AKP) won the parliamentary
elections in November 2002, the government has made EU accession its
foremost priority. Its reforms have broken some taboos, particularly
regarding the property rights of non-Muslim minorities, broadcasting
in minority languages and the legalising of private language
courses. However, many reliable sources in Turkey affirm that serious
disparities still remain between what is on paper and what happens in
practice on the ground, and significant questions therefore arise
about Turkey’s basic outlook both on the concept of change and on the
sustainability of those changes. If Turkey’s basic outlook were not
itself altered, the regulationsthat are issued regarding the
implementation of the laws could become inconsistent with the laws
themselves and thereby introduce further restrictions. As a result,
the whole purpose of reform would be compromised and public officials
could effectively end up forestalling their implementation.

According to a recent MRG Briefing, Turkey should re-engage further
its policies toward minorities’ rights in:

1. International commitments and issues of recognition
2. Religion
3. Education
4. Political participation
5. Freedom of expression and broadcasting
6. Alphabet, using personal and place names, and using language in
administrative and judicial services
7. Association and peaceful assembly
8. Freedom of movement and internal displacement
9. Discrimination as an EU acquis communautaire

The Armenian Genocide 1915

Most Armenians view the Armenian Genocide as a weal on their
collective psyche. Writers like Yehuda Bauer, Robert Melson, Howard M
Sachar and Samantha Power suggest that it provided a template for the
Jewish Holocaust. Yet, the United States of America, the United
Kingdom, Germany and Israel are complicit in this Turkish denial and
do not seem to regard Turkey’s persistent denial ofits past Ottoman
history as a violation of a whole people’s human rights.

The issue is not solely whether one million Armenians, or more or
less, were exterminated during this period. Nor could it be about the
Turkish feeble riposte that Turks massacred Armenians because the
latter allied themselvesduring WWI with Russia against Turkey. After
all, the number of Armenian Turks turning against Turkey in 1915 was
very small. Besides, the huge Hamidian massacres against Armenians in
1895, or those by Turks and Kurds in 1909 just before the Balkan Wars,
occurred not at a time of war but at a time of peace. The issue is
moral, and the facts do not exonerate Turkey from its erstwhile intent
to destroy a whole ethnic and religious group in Turkey by killing its
members.

History consolidates the moral imperative too, since many historians
world-wide – including Turkish and British historians – have
acknowledged the Armenian Genocide. I need not remind the reader of
the number of countries, parliaments or institutes that have already
recognised this first official genocide of the 20th century. Nor do I
need to quote the judgments of legal bodies suchas the New York based
International Center for Transitional Justice {assisting countries
pursuing accountability for past mass atrocity or human rights abuse}
in February 2003 stating that genocide has occurred during the
multiple horrors of WWI. At a time when we have witnessed a
realignment of the worldorder after 9/11, and where the West insists
on democracy, good governance and human rights in more open societies,
it is inadmissible that grave untruths are allowed to dictate let
alone steer foreign policy matters.

Moreover, as Dr Alfred De Zayas, Professor of International law and
former Secretary to the UN Commission on Human Rights, wrote in his
Memorandum in June 2003, the Armenian Genocide fits the legal
definition of the UN Convention of 1948. But Terrence Des Pres aptly
reminded his readers in On Governing Narratives: the Turkish-Armenian
Case, that ‘knowledge is no longer honoured for its utopian promise,
but valued for the service it furnishes.’ And as Deborah Lipstadt also
wrote in 1996, ‘Denial of genocide strives to reshape historyin order
to demonise the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators, and is –
indeed – the final stage of genocide.’

In her book Trauma and Recovery, Dr Judith Lewis Herman wrote that
criminal behaviour is always defined by the perpetrator’s compulsion
‘to promote forgetting’. She added that ‘secrecy and silence are the
perpetrator’s first line of defence’. If that fails, ‘the perpetrator
attacks the credibility of his victim’. And if he cannot silence his
victim, ‘he tries to make sure that no one listens’ by either denying
or rationalising his crime. Today, Turkey might well deem that it is
in its interest to deny the Armenian Genocide for reasons of pride as
much as for fear over the consequences of recognition – namely
restitution. However, the political and economic dividends that would
accrue to Turkey and its neighbouring countries (including Armenia) as
a result of good neighbourly relations in the Caucasus are
enormous. Yet, to achieve this goal, recognition becomes an
indispensable tool not only to globalise the whole region, but also to
unburden both the victims and survivors of the Armenian Genocide of
the heavy cross they have been bearing for eighty-nine years.

 Conclusion

There are those who profess that Turkey’s membership to the EU would
put a stop to its rampant nationalism and curb the stranglehold of the
military establishment on democracy, human rights and fundamental
freedoms. Others also use the ‘religious card’ as an argument in
favour of accession. Turkey must be admitted to the EU, they say, to
prove that Europe is not a Christian club.>From a more subjective
perspective, some Armenians also add that such a step would force
Turkey to remove its blockade of Armenia and that EU citizenship would
provide Armenian Turks with freedom of movement.

Notwithstanding those arguments, which could ostensibly be either
right or wrong, the trenchant fact remains that Turkey has simply not
fulfilled the criteria that would allow its admission into the EU
club. I am not yet convinced that a credible argument could be made
today for Turkey’s EU accession. Moreover, I reject the expedient
religious card since it is tantamount to stating that Israel must be
admitted into the Arab League to prove that it is not a Muslim club.

Four months shy of the cut-off date of December 2004, I recognise that
the political and socio-economic stakes are high, and therefore the
bars must correspondingly be high too. However, the pragmatist in me
recognises that the ultimate decision for or against accession will be
made in the uncompromisingly introverted political corridors of power
– not at the European Parliament or in the intellectual and
research-friendly corridors of a think tank or NGO.

Might I therefore suggest two litmus tests? The burden of proof should
rest on Turkey to prove unequivocally that it meets all the Copenhagen
criteria in order to ensure that its accession would enhance rather
than impede the EU momentum and system of values. Turkey should also
lift the fog of untruth that surrounds its denial to the Armenian
Genocide by assuming responsibility for the aggregate crimes
perpetrated against Armenian Turks by its predecessor regime.

If this were to happen in a transparent and verifiable way, and if
reciprocity establishes its relevance in Armenian-Turkish relations, I
re-iterate a promise I made to a Turkish journalist friend last week
that I would personally welcome Turkey into the EU. But Merhaba is a
sign of welcome that comes with definition and trust.
It is not a cheap giveaway greeting!

CARDIFF CITY COUNCIL RECOGNISES THE SIGNIFICANCE
OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Following in the steps of Gwynedd County Council that recognised
the Armenian Genocide by a unanimous vote in March 2004,
Wales again leads the way today.

The Council of Wales’ capital City, Cardiff, has now officially recognised
the truth of the genocide by deciding to incorporate references to it in
its Holocaust Memorial Day service in 2005 and in future years.

We believe that this is the first time a major city in Britain (in this
case the capital of Wales) has decided to accord such recognition
to the Armenian Genocide in its Holocaust Memorial Day Service.

In a letter to Wales-Armenia Solidarity, an associate body of CRAG
in Wales, Councillor Rodney Berman, Leader of Cardiff Council, wrote:

Ref EM2071

29 Sept 2004

Following further consideration I am writing to inform you that we will
be incorporating specific reference to the Armenian Holocaust in the
commemorative service of 2005 and for future years.

I am sure this will meet with your agreement.

Councillor Rodney Berman
(Leader of Cardiff Council)
Leader’s Office
Room 525
County Hall
Atlantic Wharf
CardiffCF10 4UW

CRAG congratulates Cardiff for its charting initiative, and also thanks
Wales-Armenia Solidarity, and particularly Mr Eilian Williams, for the
tireless efforts expended toward this goal.

With HMD 2005 fast approaching, it is high time that due consideration is
shown to the Armenian British community in terms of the pain it carries
with the history and memories of the Armenian Genocide of 1915.

Armenia Readies for Direct Flights to Sofia

novinite.com
Business: 5 October 2004, Tuesday.

Regular flights between Sofia and Erevan are likely to kick off in
April 2005, the two countries agreed during the official Bulgarian
delegation’s visit in Armenia.

The transport ministers of Bulgaria and Armenia also declared
readiness to launch the ferryboat line connecting the Black Sea ports
of Varna and Caucasus.

During the visit of Bulgarian delegation headed by President Georgi
Parvanov Bulgaria’s Transport Minister Nikolay Vassilev and his
Armenian counterpart Andranik Manukyan discussed the options for
boosting bilateral economic relations.

The volume of trade turnover between the Balkan and the Caucasian
countries have increased more than 100 times over the last three
years.

Azerbaijan demands Armenia’s exclusion from Council of Europe

Oct 5 2004

BAKU. Oct 5 (Interfax) – Azerbaijan has sent a letter to the Council
of Europe demanding that Armenia be expelled from this organization.

“The document that contains the demand to exclude Armenia from the
Council of Europe has already received the status of an official PACE
document. It will be distributed among PACE countries’ representatives
on Tuesday and will be discussed at a session of the Council of Europe
ministers’ cabinet in the near future,” a representatives of
Azerbaijan’s delegation at the Strasbourg PACE session, Rafael
Guseinov, told Interfax.

“This demand is motivated by the fact that Armenia has repeatedly
violated the basic principles of the Council of Europe. Namely,
Armenia continues the occupation of 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory,
Azerbaijan being another Council of Europe country,” Guseinov said.

Baku lost control over Nagorno-Karabakh in the course of a bloody
conflict with Armenia in the 1990s.

The UN Security Council has repeatedly condemned the occupation of
Azerbaijani territory and demanded that Armenian military units be
withdrawn from it. The OSCE Minsk Group, which includes
representatives of Russia, France, and the United States, is mediating
the conflict.

Bulgarian president pleased with effort to resolve Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Khorizont Radio, Sofia
5 Oct 04

[Announcer] The presidents of Bulgaria and Armenia – Georgi Purvanov
and Robert Kocharyan – expressed their satisfaction at the activation
of the negotiating process to find a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict.

After their meeting in Yerevan the Armenian president especially
stressed the merit of our country, as OSCE chairman, and role of
Bulgarian Foreign Minister Solomon Pasi and his special envoy to
Nagorno-Karabakh, former Prime Minister Filip Dimitrov.

For his part President Georgi Purvanov said:

[Purvanov] We are inspired with hope at the activation of the talks on
Nagorno-Karabakh at the level of both Armenia and Azerbaijan
presidents and foreign ministers. We will continue to support such
efforts, as well as the activities of other groups involved in the
conflict. We hope that by the end of the Bulgarian chairmanship of
OSCE, or even afterward, a relatively lasting political solution to
this problem will be found, because, there is no substitute for a
political solution.

[Announcer] Bilateral relations and developing transportation links
were another topic of the Purvanov-Kocharyan talks. According to the
assurance of the cochairmen of the joint Bulgarian-Armenian
commission, a direct Sofia-Yerevan flight will be launched in the
coming months.

>From the statements of the two presidents it became clear that work
is being done to create a ferry-boat link between the two countries
with the participation of Russia.

HIGH FEST INTERNATIONAL THEATER FESTIVAL KICKS OFF IN YEREVAN

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 5, ARMENPRESS: The second High Fest
internationaltheater festival started in Yerevan on October 2. The
first was held in 2003 The festival is organized by the Union of
Armenian Actors, SCF/BCCP-Armenia (Stichting Caucasus Foundation-The
Netherlands/Bureau for Caucasian Cultural Programs) and “ALFAEL”
Productions. The main goal of the festival is to present the World
Theatrical Art in Armenia and to promote the Armenian Theatre in other
countries.

The festival offers the audience a unique opportunity to see the
highly artistic samples of multi-genre theatrical art, such as drama
and comedy, musicals and dance performances, marionette and puppetry,
plastic and verbal, mime and street performances.

Theatre companies (more than 120 participants) from 18 countries
(UK, France, Russia, Germany, Switzerland, Korea, Sweden, Spain,
Serbia, Israel, Georgia, Czech Republic, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Romania
etc.) are participating. On the sidelines of the festival playwriting
workshop with world famous writer Paulo Coelho will be held.

Performances are being held on 14 venues of Yerevan. Besides the
main program of the festival other events, such as seminars, master
classes willbe organized to create a favorable atmosphere for exchange
of ideas and experience. The VIP experts will lead a number of
seminars aimed at increasing the awareness of Armenian students and
artists on Arts and Cultural Management, International Cooperation in
Arts, Cultural Policy issues. The master classes led will concentrate
on new trends and methods of contemporary theatrical art and will
present the new approaches in different spheres of theatre.

AMERICAN ARMENIAN STUDENT REACHED THE TOP OF MOUNT ARARAT

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 5, ARMENPRESS: On Sept 11, the day of St. Cross,
American Armenian student Cameron Johnson Rebejian climbed the top of
Mount Ararat, together with one Kurd and two Czechs,
Self-Determination Union leader Paruyr Hayrikian told reporters.

Cameron Johnson Rebejian devoted his pilgrimage to the 175-th
anniversary of the date when Khachatur Abovian hiked the mount and to
the victims of Sept 11 terrorist act in New York.

According to initial arrangements, the American Armenian should
have mounted Ararat together with Paruyr Hayrikian. However, because
Hayrikian is a rejected person in Turkey and did not want to change
his name, the plan fizzled out.